The Best of 2004 - A Future Look

[tabuno]

With the movie season more than half over, it's almost time to begin looking at this year's crop of movies and the awards season both the ones seen and the ones remaining to be seen.

1. Kill Bill No. 2. This is the best movie of the year from a script, cinematography, character standpoint. A substantive and deeper as well as more edgy, emotional version than the over the top Volume No. 1 which tended towards satire of a number of genre.

2. Spartan. This is one of the best espionage movies in many years, recalling past Cold War movies with their edgy (less action oriented) more implied emotional roller coaster that depends more of acting, performance, and script handling than special effects and over the top thrills.

3. Spiderman 2. Easily one of the best of the year because it captures both the superhero pyrotechnics along with a solid storyline and character development. A great Jaws - the Movie -renovation that combines many of the psychological elements of good film making.

4. Passion of the Christ. A stirring 24 hour intense and focussed look at one of the most famous characters of all of theater. The emotional tragedy and intensity, the sincerity of character and original language and apparent veracity-looking, sounding film is a brilliant example of movie-making.

5. Against the Ropes. Meg Ryan performs one of her best roles in a difficult genre of male boxing. She achieves a underrated Demi Moore performance (as in Strip Tease) that was overlooked because of the nature of the male sport. A good look a the sport and the humanity that Ryan brought to a true story, real life character.

6. Connie and Carla. One of the more difficult performances of women acting as men acting as women. This movie captured the humorous and sensitive nature of the sexes along with a delightful David Duchovy straight man.

7. Day After Tomorrow. The biggest, explosive disaster movie of all time that almost contained a strong human story. A well balanced movie of an epic magnitude without getting lost in the special effects.

8. The Terminal. A different and well acted Tom Hanks in a microcosm of a world in an air terminal. An almost independent movie feel along with a more bittersweet ending that allows the audience to focus on humanity instead of fantasy.

9. The Stepford Wives. A rather off-kilter horror-comedy movie (a very difficult blend) done well that brings smiles to the more mature audiences.

Honorable Mention.

13 Going On 30. Jennifer Garner will puts on a delicious show.

Mean Girls. A relevant, above average coming of age movie.

50 First Dates. Drew and Adam are continuing their development as actors.


Movies To Watch For

The Bourne Supremacy (July 23, 2004)
Catwoman (July 23, 2004)
The Manchurian Candidate (July 30, 2004)
Collateral (August 6, 2004)
Shall We Dance (remake - October 15, 2004)
Alexander (November 5, 2004)

[Johann]

Good topic, tabuno!

Yes, the year is zipping by.

I agree that Kill Bill vol.2 is one of the years best films and Spiderman 2 will make my top ten for year with no problem. (I'm seeing it again on friday- I'll comment more after)

I haven't seen Spartan and I wish I saw it during it's run- I love Mamet. Chris' review is probably bang-on. I'll rent the DVD.

The Passion of the Christ was great in terms of production value and pure "moviemaking", but it's content leaves me a little indifferent. It's hard to make the final days of Christ seem important anymore. I would have liked it more if it played as a silent film and black and white. That would have been something to rave about. Nothing new in this film, except gratuitous violence.

I haven't seen Spielberg's latest, and I don't know if I will. I'm losing interest in Tom Hanks fast. The Ladykillers? Please.
The Terminal is probably really sharp- just like Catch Me If You Can, and I'll wait until it's on DVD.

Oliver Stone's Alexander may be the best film of the year. I'm so biased for Stone it's embarrasing. All apologies.
This one will be AMAZING. I'm just as pumped for Alexander as I was for Eyes Wide Shut. Godspeed in that editing room, Oliver...

The rest of the films on your lists were standard movies, tabuno.

[JustaFied]

Some films I'm looking forward to seeing the remainder of the year:

Proof - John Madden's film adaptation of David Auburn's Pulitzer Prize winning play. Gwyenth Paltrow plays the lead.

Garden State - Looks interesting, though some claim it's a knockoff of The Graduate.

I Heart Huckabee's - David O. Russell's first film since Three Kings. A movie about existential issues, starring Jude Law, Naomi Watts, and Dustin Hoffman. Cool.

The Life Aquatic - Will Wes Anderson's fourth film be a dud? Were those rumors true about chaos on the set and an unhappy Bill Murray? Stay tuned.

And of course, Alexander.

[tabuno]

In a great year for spy movies, The Bourne Supremacy came out to compete with Spartan for best espionage movie of the year. Bourne is more mainstream but as realistic in many ways as Spartan. Brian Cox weakened The Bourne Supremacy somewhat and its ending is more in line with American tastes so that Spartan comes out with the more edgier feel and best honors I believe. However, The Bourne Supremacy would rank in one of my top ten movies of the year.

It is time for a new spy hero, one that bleeds and doesn't have to rely on over the top special effects to earn his or her credentials.

[HorseradishTree]

Finally saw Spartan. Mamet has done it again.

Like his other films, Mamet keeps straight and minute dialogue throughout with fine performances to practice them. Things slowly develop and grab you in. Definitely on my top ten for '04.

[arsaib4]

Originally posted by Johann

Oliver Stone's Alexander may be the best film of the year. I'm so biased for Stone it's embarrasing. All apologies.

No apologies necessay, i'm a huge fan also who was just as exited about Alexander as you seem to be UNTIL i saw the commercial and from the look of it, atleast to me, it's more 'Lord of the Rings' or 'Troy' than what i was expecting based on Stone's previous work.

Now the American film i am most looking forward to becomes Russel's I Heart Huckabee's, Isabelle Huppert supposedly has a small part in the film.

[tabuno]

"Alexander" directed by Oliver Stone starring Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, and Anthony Hopkins versus "Troy" directed by Wolfgang Petersen starring Brad Pitt, Eric Bana, and
Orlando Bloom.

Such direct competition may cancel each other out this year. It will be interesting to see which, if either, movie will be able to breakout this year and be remembered until the next year.

[JustaFied]

Originally posted by arsaib4
Now the American film i am most looking forward to becomes Russel's I Heart Huckabee's, Isabelle Huppert supposedly has a small part in the film.

Trailer's up now:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox_searchlight/i_heart_huckabees/

I have no idea what the film is about based on the trailer, but it sure looks interesting. I guess it subject matter is existentialism in America. Jason Schwartzman (of "Rushmore" fame) and Dustin Hoffman are in it; they're probably related in the film, as they look so much alike.

Also, David O. Russell has just made a documentary on the Iraq war. Conveniently, it will be included in a newly released DVD of "Three Kings", which was of course about the first Gulf War. Here's an article:
'Three Kings' Director Plans Documentary on Iraq War
By SHARON WAXMAN

Published: August 16, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/16/movies/16warn.html

[pmw]

Well, I happened to catch a screening of I Heart Huckabees the other day and I was...sorry to say...disappointed. I really wanted a good one, because I've liked Russel's other work, but this didn't cut it for me. It felt like he was trying to be "quirky" (ala anderson and the other anderson), and there was a lot of borrowing from other recent films. It just didn't have Russel's personal stamp and in terms of ideas, I'm not sure that it really goes anywhere. The energy of the movie was impressive, but I didn't get along with the substance.


On the other hand, "Sideways" from Alexander Payne (About Schmidt) was tremendous, and I think maybe among the top 3 of the year for me. I will try and write more about both in better terms in the coming days. After seeing Sideways, Im again excited about american filmmakers. He's really testing the boundaries and playing with alot of American themes. Really great film.

P

[JustaFied]

Thanks for the recommendation on "Sideways". Glad to see Payne's back on track after "About Schmidt", which I found a bit stale.

Maybe "I Heart Huckabee's" is more akin to Russell's first two films ("Spanking the Monkey" and "Flirting with Disaster") than to "Three Kings"? The latter seemed to be more focused and serious. "Flirting with Disaster" is all over the place (literally as well, they travel around the country), it would therefore probably qualify as "quirky", but I still found its light comedic touch refreshing.

[arsaib4]

Thanks Justafied, an interesting article to say the least. Our opinions about the war and the rest matter little when the participants feel this way. Btw, this dvd release of Three Kings is a re-release, right?

Sorry to hear about I Heart Huckabees pmw, I was looking forward to it and still am but what you had to say sounds just the way i'd describe most american indies nowadays.

[pmw]

Originally posted by arsaib4

Sorry to hear about I Heart Huckabees pmw, I was looking forward to it and still am but what you had to say sounds just the way i'd describe most american indies nowadays.

It seems like most American film makers want to be media darlings, a Sunday Times "genius", instead of...well just plain old original/artful/interesting filmmakers. I think we're really in the thick of it lately, and I imagine it will thin out in a few years, but seems like every wants to cash in being a frazzley-haired auteur. Ugh.

I did like Three Kings though. For sure. And Im very gald it's being rereleased. Its perhaps more relevant now than when it came out originally. So good to see filmmakers using their influence in interesting ways.

P

[JustaFied]

Originally posted by pmw
It seems like most American film makers want to be media darlings, a Sunday Times "genius", instead of...well just plain old original/artful/interesting filmmakers. I think we're really in the thick of it lately, and I imagine it will thin out in a few years, but seems like every wants to cash in being a frazzley-haired auteur. Ugh.

I'm not necessarily arguing with you here, but just curious what examples you're thinking of specifically. What is it about the films of these "media darlings" that you don't like?

[pmw]

Originally posted by JustaFied
I'm not necessarily arguing with you here, but just curious what examples you're thinking of specifically. What is it about the films of these "media darlings" that you don't like?

I think it's that they're made in too much of an attempt to reflect the filmmaker as auteur/media darling/etc instead of to create a work that stands on its own, uninfringed upon by the image of the filmmaker. Now, if the films Im thinking of were great films, that would be fine, but they seem to come up short as films. Aesthetically, there are some characterics that link them - the characters are disenfranchised, self-indulgent, cute and increasingly uninteresting. They coopt an indie aesthetic but bear few of the original elements that I think are needed to validate a film as artistically innovative.

I hate to dump on Zach Braff, but his film is a pre-packaged indie-darling that is so insipidly boring but has no problem coopting aesthetic/conceptual elements of a few certain films that we could all identify. To me this is really boring. Sure, borrow some of the elements around you, but make something new and relevant for pete's sake (me).

I feel the same way about Sofia, although I know a lot of people would disagree. To be completely honest, were I to have made a film a number of years ago, I probably would have been guilty of the same. But more recent interest in foreign offerings and to art at large has reminded me of a more interesting purpose in film - to make something compelling that does something new and innovates in some way. Part and parcel with that is an understanding of what came before your film/art/book/whatever, and of course you work in a contemporary context, but you have to blaze some new ground to be my media darling. I am more than happy to heap accolades on a great film/filmmaker.

hmm... hope that's a start to a very difficult question. There are a lot of intentions, definitions and details that I've stepped around here... as well as subjective opinions.

Let me go a little further. I think it may be that these films don't know why they quote what they quote. They don't know what to do with the quotes to make them interesting again. It's just a hip time to be using certain quotes. And it's recycled and watered down with each successive use. Lot's more can be said Im sure... What do you think?

P

[arsaib4]

I agree with what Peter had to say earlier, but after reading his post one might say, well, why dump on Zach Braff or Sofia Coppola as they are very young filmmakers, give them time to develop. Not a bad point at all, but here they are not just being compared to other american filmmakers and their lesser films, their efforts especially after the kind of publicity they got are being put along side Reygadas' Japon and Zvyagintsev's The Return and this is where they come up short, way short in the eyes of a knowledgable fan.

On the other hand when an american filmmaker is cited to be an origianal voice like Peter Sollet (Raising Victor Vargas), not just here but around the world, our public thanks to our fine distribution, never get a chance to truly appreciate the effort.

[HorseradishTree]

I'll be seeing Garden State tomorrow, so I'll have something to say, I'm sure.

As for Sofia, I haven't really noticed anything great about her. I don't feel like giving her time to develop as I really haven't even noticed any talent at all. The only thing keeping me sitting through Lost in Translation was Bill Murray.

[pmw]

Originally posted by arsaib4
one might say, well, why dump on Zach Braff or Sofia Coppola as they are very young filmmakers, give them time to develop.

That is a good point, and I am overly hard on the young American filmmakers. I think it stems from what I see as artistic shortcomings despite all of the resources. If you look at some of the better Chinese / Thai / European directors of the same age, they are working way outside the budgetary range of the "young american filmschool" and making better stuff.

I agree with development though. Out of 10 directors, a handful will emmerge and make better films than their previous work. It would be exciting to see work that I liked by Coppola, P.T. Anderson, Braff ...

I also believe in the creativity of the American mind. I mean, The Coens, Linklater, Payne, W. Anderson all make films that I connect with, so I'm being picky when I go after some of the others...

P

[JustaFied]

Good dialogue going. Hopefully, they're not making these films with the main goal of being "Sunday Times media darlings", I don't think that's your accusation here. Perhaps they simply need to focus more on being creative in the script process and really trying to do something new. It's not enough to simply reference the films that have come before, it's becomes creative and clever when they expand on that and make something fresh and new. As far as the two recent American filmmakers you've mentioned, they're probably farther along in the appearance area of the film than in the subject matter area, if I'm hearing you correctly.

I went to see "Garden State" yesterday, and I couldn't sit through the whole thing. I can't remember the last time I left a movie before it ended. Every character and scene was "quirky", so much so that it completely ruined the chance of the film suceeding on any other level. It seemed that every scene designed to stand out as clever was out of place with what was going on in the film. You could see the script process before you as a bunch of cute ideas that somehow had to congeal to form a storyline. It didn't work very well. The reason I left, specifically, was that Natalie Portman's character said she was epileptic, and I just knew that she was going to have a seizure at some inoportune moment later in the film. This would be a landmark moment in the film in which Zach Braff's character would have a revelation. This was too much for me to bear, I had to leave. To anyone who's seen the whole film, is this what happened? I'm mildly curious, actually. I'd be really surprised if the film turns out different; the whole thing was predictable (and slow) from the start. Enough on that.

I differentiate "Lost in Translation" from this film in that Coppola didn't try to take on so much with her subject matter. Braff's film is about the search for meaning for 20 somethings, so beware his attempts at big, meaningful moments. "Lost in Translation", on the other hand, is simply a story of a couple of lonely strangers sharing friendship (and possibly a little more) over a period of a few days. It's a sweet, delicate story told with a light touch.

[arsaib4]

The troubling thing to me is also how quickly films like 'Garden State' and 'Lost in Translation' get mentioned in the same sentence as 'The Graduate' or 'Harold and Maude' or 'In the Mood for love.' Such praise or such publicity can only hurt a filmmaker in the future.

[JustaFied]

Allright, trailer's out for Wes Anderson's "Life Aquatic", scheduled for Dec. '04 release. Here's a link:

http://www.empiremovies.com/movies/2004/the_life_aquatic.shtml

Looks similar in style to "Royal Tenenbaums". Here's hoping the story can keep up with the visuals and the overall eccentricity.

[HorseradishTree]

Garden State was great. My fav of the year so far, but there's still much to come.

It was really one of those "Fuck yeah!" movies which made you want to do something with your life, similar to a lot of Linklater's stuff.

While many characters were unrealistic, Braff seemed to direct everyone in a way that made them seem real even though they really weren't.

To boot, Peter Sarsgaard really pulled in another great performance.

All right, I've planted my base. Now I'm ready to debate.

[cinemabon]

I sort of got the feeling from the orginal post a few days ago that this was about the best films of 2004... what it has become is rather confusing.

I was looking over the original list... Day After Tomorrow? Stepford Wives? as the best of 2004? Aren't these rather mundane commercial offerings at best? Even Spiderman 2 is rather superficial, although for it's genre, I would say it was one of the best films yet. As to some of the other choices, Passion of the Christ may have hit it big with right wing WASPs, but the buzz in Hollywood is very resentful. At the most, it will get some technical awards. I doubt it will get more than that. Gibson has alienated himself with the Jewish community, which is very powerful in Hollywood, a big mistake, just ask Jesse Jackson (remember "Hymie Town?")

There are some big films coming up that look quite impressive this fall and winter. As usual, the big guns will be shot in November and December. Phantom of the Opera, Ray, The Aviator, Ladder 49, Silver City, A Sound of Thunder, DiG!, Kinsey, and many more have yet to open. Sky Captain is a highly stylized film that fits right into your penchant for sci-fi fantasy (filmmed entirely in front of blue screen).

When the gloves come off this fall, then we can begin that list in earnest. I believe the only retro-film the Academy will look back on will be Kill Bill, No. 2, since the first one was recognized and everyone agrees the sequel is better. Even with its DVD release, Passion will be yesterday's news come next January when the Academy comes to a vote.

[arsaib4]

Well, the films mentioned in the original post (tabuno) haven't been discussed because as you mentioned they are more mundane commercial offerings. Most of the thread has actually been about the state of american indies, Garden State, Sofia Coppola etc.,. I agree that 'Kill Bill Vol.2' will be one of the films academy will look back on but I certainly hope that both 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' and 'Before Sunset' are not forgotten.

[tabuno]

I must be a mundane commercial guy I guess. Somebody has to be. Let's here it for the average American consumer.

[Johann]

So far this year I'm pretty happy with what we've been thrown by the studios.

My top ten list of "good movies":

1. Spiderman 2
2. Hellboy
3. The Punisher
4. Kill Bill vol. 2
5. Starsky & Hutch
6. Eurotrip
7. Festival Express
8. The Exorcist: The Beginning
9. Alien Vs. Predator
10. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

the top three art films:

Dogville
The Dreamers
Coffee & Cigarettes

Films I wish I saw: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Spartan, Collateral, Hero, The Saddest Music in the World, and Touching the Void.

What I'm looking forward to: Alexander, The Aviator and Team America: World Police.

The most important film of the year was made by Michael Moore and the worst film of the year is a tie between White Chicks and The Whole Ten Yards.

[tabuno]

September 1st - Vanity Fair. Reese Witherspoon makes one of the smartest casting decisions of any young female actor this year. This lavish, elegant historical movie piece looks to be one of the surprises of the year.

September 17th - Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. This movie looks to be stylish and a look back at the adventure movies of the 40s. Something different to look at.

September 24th - The Forgotten. One of the most bewildering, mysterious looking movies of the year.

October 22nd - Finding Neverland. Johnny Depp comes back with a historical drama with fantasy undertones that may capture a large audience and a winter time entertainment leading to another Oscar nomination.

November - The Aviator. Leonardo DiCaprio returns under the helm of Martin Scorsese that will see strong efforts made towards securing an Oscar nomination for this movie.

[tabuno]

The Bourne Supremacy, Collateral, Little Black Book, Hidalgo, The Manchurian Candidate made my list bumping some of earlier favorites down:

1. Kill Bill No. 2. This is the best movie of the year from a script, cinematography, character standpoint. A substantive and deeper as well as more edgy, emotional version than the over the top Volume No. 1 which tended towards satire of a number of genre.

2. Spartan. This is one of the best espionage movies in many years, recalling past Cold War movies with their edgy (less action oriented) more implied emotional roller coaster that depends more of acting, performance, and script handling than special effects and over the top thrills.

3. Collateral. A great performance by Tom Cruise focusing on the rarely portrayed badguy with substance. I loved the experience, dialogue, and the flavor of the movie.

4. (3.) Spiderman 2. Easily one of the best of the year because it captures both the superhero pyrotechnics along with a solid storyline and character development. A great Jaws - the Movie -renovation that combines many of the psychological elements of good film making.

5. (4.) Passion of the Christ. A stirring 24 hour intense and focussed look at one of the most famous characters of all of theater. The emotional tragedy and intensity, the sincerity of character and original language and apparent veracity-looking, sounding film is a brilliant example of movie-making.

6. The Bourne Supremacy. The new James Bond of the new century. This less special effects and fly by the seat of your pants spy thriller uses a more personal and emotional approach to the typical espionage movie. Nearly perfect in its execution - it presents the chase in its more human aspect though not as stark and raw as Spartan.

7. Little Black Book. A special tribute to romantic comedies with a great, wrenching ending. A great script that the producers or director wisely decided to go with a solid, meaningful production rather than the usual, dopey string of stupid women.

8. (5.) Against the Ropes. Meg Ryan performs one of her best roles in a difficult genre of male boxing. She achieves a underrated Demi Moore performance (as in Strip Tease) that was overlooked because of the nature of the male sport. A good look a the sport and the humanity that Ryan brought to a true story, real life character.

9. (6.) Connie and Carla. One of the more difficult performances of women acting as men acting as women. This movie captured the humorous and sensitive nature of the sexes along with a delightful David Duchovy straight man.

10. (7.) Day After Tomorrow. The biggest, explosive disaster movie of all time that almost contained a strong human story. A well balanced movie of an epic magnitude without getting lost in the special effects.

Honorable Mention.

The Terminal. A different and well acted Tom Hanks in a microcosm of a world in an air terminal. An almost independent movie feel along with a more bittersweet ending that allows the audience to focus on humanity instead of fantasy.

The Stepford Wives. A rather off-kilter horror-comedy movie (a very difficult blend) done well that brings smiles to the more mature audiences.

13 Going On 30. Jennifer Garner will puts on a delicious show.

Mean Girls. A relevant, above average coming of age movie.

50 First Dates. Drew and Adam are continuing their development as actors.

The Manchurian Candidate. A good performance by Denzel Washington along with a compelling touching script (though somewhat melodramatic).

Hidalgo. A great adventure movie without the usual over the top scenes and exploits. A tamer, but more involving entertainment of this genre.

[arsaib4]

Originally posted by tabuno
I must be a mundane commercial guy I guess.

tabuno, don't be so modest, from some of the reviews and other posts that i've read, you seem to be a well reasoned and knowledgable person, more than an average film fan. I repeated the words "mundane commercial offerings" because that's what they are to me and probably to most others who haven't seen the films, it's nice that you decided to talk about some of the ones you were looking forward to the most and you've increased my curiosity.

[JustaFied]

Originally posted by HorseradishTree
It was really one of those "Fuck yeah!" movies which made you want to do something with your life, similar to a lot of Linklater's stuff.

Glad you liked it. Maybe, at 30, I'm too old and cynical now. (Actually, I'm the same age as Braff, so who knows). I found it sort of convenient that he was on lithium for so many years, so he was finally able to "wake up" and get on with his life. I'm leery of films where characters have epiphanies and can thus suddenly change their lives overnight. Life is more complicated than that, in my (hardened) view. Braff sort of glosses over that.

[tabuno]

September 10:

Reconstruction - space/time love affair?
THX-1138 - the Director's cut


September 17:

Enduring Love - Hot balloon rescue
The Final Cut - Robin Williams' One Hour Photo sci fi sequel version

[arsaib4]

I am looking for to it, it's a Danish film which won the Camera D'or (best first film) last year at Cannes. From what i've heard director Christoffer Boe has inventively shot the film in order to portray it's fractured narrative.

[oscar jubis]

I was disatisfied with the comments made in previous posts regarding Garden State, which did not offer any help in deciding whether I should see it. Maybe some members want to discuss it further. IMDb voters rate the film in third place for 2004, tied with Kill Bill 2 and below Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Before Sunset. Opinion here was wildly discordant. I'll try to recap (please correct me if I'm wrong).
pmw found it "pre-packaged" and "insipidly boring". The latter being, in my opinion, a highly subjective matter having to do with one's own level of interest.
Justafied actually walked out early, anticipating the likelyhood that Ms. Portman's character would "have a seizure at some inoportune moment". She doesn't. He also mentions being "leery of characters who have epiphanies".
H. Tree says Garden State is "great". Actually, his "fave of the year so far". But he doesn't really expound on why he liked it so much.
Somewhere the word "quirky" is mentioned.

Since I'm taking Dylan to the UM-FSU football game on Friday (Canes have won 5 in a row by 3 points or less!), I asked Chelsea to pick a film for both of us to watch Labor Day and she chose Garden State.

The film is too inconsistent in tone and execution to be among the best of the year, with a canned moment here and there and a forced "quirkiness" at times. But I cared about the central character from the get go, and some very funny bits kept me entertained. I've witnessed clients undergo more radical changes than Lagerman's, when going on or off psychotropic medication. So the "epiphany" rang true. And most importantly, even though condensed to four days, the arc of the romantic relationship, the way it developed, was well-conceived. I treasure most the brief scenes involving Lagerman and his father, whose anger and contempt seethe just beneath the surface. On the other hand, the whole quest for a piece of cheap jewelry belonging to the deceased mother is overwrought, even ludicrous at times. But Braff offers ample compensation.

[JustaFied]

Originally posted by oscar jubis
I was disatisfied with the comments made in previous posts regarding Garden State, which did not offer any help in deciding whether I should see it.

Sorry Oscar. I'll try to expand on what I disliked about the film.

First of all, I'll admit I rushed to judgment in assuming that Braff's character would have an "epiphany" after Portman's character suffered another seizure. You've since told us that she did not, in fact, suffer such an epileptic fit, and Braff may not have actually had a moment of revelation. This was a faulty assumption on my part on where the movie was headed. Perhaps I was in a particularly critical mood the day I saw the film; I try to achieve a certain balance/harmony before watching a movie, to see the film as objectively as possible, but it doesn't always work.

That said, I thought the film was still too cute, or "quirky", for its own good. It gave the film a rather artificial flavor. At times, it seemed like nothing more than a series of cute vignettes. For example, one of the scenes in the film's trailer is Braff standing against a wall the color and pattern of which matched his shirt identically. This scene, and the leadup to it, was completely artificially constructed and had no relevance at all to anything in the rest of the film. Something about Braff's mother wallpapering her bathroom and then her friend making him a shirt, which happened to be from the same material (why?). Then the picture of him in the bathroom, blending right in. Is this supposed to be profound in some way, like Dustin Hoffman floating at the bottom of the pool in The Graduate? To me, it was a pretentious and unnecessarily random moment in the film, a foreboding for the rest of the film. Almost every character had some sort of eccentricity in either his character or his surroundings which was intended to be our primary basis of understanding this character. Braff had been on lithium for 10 years, then he stopped. His father hated him. He had a motorcyle with a sidecar. Portman was an epileptic with her own helmet. Portman had a "brother" (and he was black!) who came to the family via Sally Struthers. Portman had a pet cemetary in the back yard. Their friend invented silent velcro and yet lived alone in an unfurnished house. Their other friend was a gravedigger, and his mom (with whom he shared a bong) was banging some guy who worked at Medieval Times. He wore his armor at the breakfast table. Now you understand the characters, there's your movie. Its quirkiness reminded me at times of Rushmore, but unlike Garden State, the characters and story in Wes Anderson's film had a depth to support the slick layer of quirkiness. There was something below the surface.

I'm sure that medication, or the lack thereof, can change people's outlooks on life and provide new direction. I don't mean to belittle those effects. It just seemed like Braff artificially inserted this facet of the story to explain his character's change in mindset without needing to look for deeper or more subtle explanations. It seemed like something out of Screenwriting 101, and I found it rather boring.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by JustaFied
Perhaps I was in a particularly critical mood the day I saw the film

How refreshing to read an acknowledgement that one's mood and state of mind are variables impacting on one's response to a given film. I was probably in a generous mood, glad to be at a theatre after they closed for three days due to the threat of a hurricane.

At times, it seemed like nothing more than a series of cute vignettes.

There's a core to this film, namely Lagerman, that keeps the film grounded. Lagerman and his relationships with his father and Sam, provide a counterpoint to the often quirky peripheral characters and absurdist humor.

Something about Braff's mother wallpapering her bathroom and then her friend making him a shirt, which happened to be from the same material (why?). Then the picture of him in the bathroom, blending right in. Is this supposed to be profound in some way? To me, it was a pretentious and unnecessarily random moment in the film, a foreboding for the rest of the film.

No, not profound; and perhaps ridiculous as far as the character making the shirt for a man she hasn't seen in at least nine years, if ever. But for me, as an spectator, this visual cue conveyed with great economy, how invisible and second-hand Large feels. It worked for me in the same way that the ripped spigot from a gas pump conveys his numbed absent-mindedness.

Its quirkiness reminded me at times of Rushmore, but unlike Garden State, the characters and story in Wes Anderson's film had a depth to support the slick layer of quirkiness.

Rushmore is without a doubt a better movie. Both films exude affection for their offbeat characters. I liked Garden State. You've expressed your reservations with conviction and clarity. Thanks.

I'm sure that medication, or the lack thereof, can change people's outlooks on life and provide new direction. I don't mean to belittle those effects.

While working at a State Psych Hospital years ago, I noticed an unusual number of discharges of patients that had been there for many years. I learned that most had experienced radical improvement in their ability to perceive reality and communicate with others upon being put on a new type of anti-psychotic medication (Ristaril). Suddenly I was very busy making arrangements to return these folks to community living. Lithium is primarily prescribed to normalize mood, helping avoid the peaks and valleys experienced mostly by "bipolars" (formerly known as manic-depressive illness). Discontinuation of lithium would have quite an impact on an average individual (not necessarily for the better). We are given reason to believe that in this case, his father prescribing lithium and sending Large to boarding school is self-serving.

[tabuno]

Next To Last of Best of 2004 Films
(The Popular Movies available in the United States)

1. Dogville. Nichole Kidman offers up a performance in a script that is super rich in acting, a blend of a movie directed stage production that penetrates into the inner core of the human soul. One of the most powerful portrayals of social and interpersonal interactions on film.

2. (1.) Kill Bill No. 2. This is among the best movies of the year from a script, cinematography, character standpoint. A substantive and deeper as well as more edgy, emotional version than the over the top Volume No. 1 which tended towards satire of a number of genre.

3. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Jim Carrey offers up his best dramatic and strangely twisting relational movies so far. A heartfelt, energizing look into the innerworkings of memory and love and hate.

4. (2.) Spartan. This is one of the best espionage movies in many years, recalling past Cold War movies with their edgy (less action oriented) more implied emotional roller coaster that depends more of acting, performance, and script handling than special effects and over the top thrills.

5. (3.) Collateral. A great performance by Tom Cruise focusing on the rarely portrayed badguy with substance. I loved the experience, dialogue, and the flavor of the movie.

6. The Incredibles. The most delicious, socially relevant and dazzling uses of contemporary state of the art animated movies of the best. The brings home the art of the possible and captures the supreme essence of animation at its best.

7. (4.) (3.) Spiderman 2. Easily one of the best of the year because it captures both the superhero pyrotechnics along with a solid storyline and character development. A great Jaws - the Movie -renovation that combines many of the psychological elements of good film making.

8. (5.) (4.) Passion of the Christ. A stirring 24 hour intense and focussed look at one of the most famous characters of all of theater. The emotional tragedy and intensity, the sincerity of character and original language and apparent veracity-looking, sounding film is a brilliant example of movie-making.

9. (6.) The Bourne Supremacy. The new James Bond of the new century. This less special effects and fly by the seat of your pants spy thriller uses a more personal and emotional approach to the typical espionage movie. Nearly perfect in its execution - it presents the chase in its more human aspect though not as stark and raw as Spartan.

10. (7.) Little Black Book. A special tribute to romantic comedies with a great, wrenching ending. A great script that the producers or director wisely decided to go with a solid, meaningful production rather than the usual, dopey string of stupid women.

Honorable Mention.

Against the Ropes. Meg Ryan performs one of her best roles in a difficult genre of male boxing. She achieves a underrated Demi Moore performance (as in Strip Tease) that was overlooked because of the nature of the male sport. A good look a the sport and the humanity that Ryan brought to a true story, real life character.

Connie and Carla. One of the more difficult performances of women acting as men acting as women. This movie captured the humorous and sensitive nature of the sexes along with a delightful David Duchovy straight man.

Day After Tomorrow. The biggest, explosive disaster movie of all time that almost contained a strong human story. A well balanced movie of an epic magnitude without getting lost in the special effects.

The Terminal. A different and well acted Tom Hanks in a microcosm of a world in an air terminal. An almost independent movie feel along with a more bittersweet ending that allows the audience to focus on humanity instead of fantasy.

The Stepford Wives. A rather off-kilter horror-comedy movie (a very difficult blend) done well that brings smiles to the more mature audiences.

Alfie. A great update with a heart to heart relationship movie about a playboy who meets the real world. Jude Law is excellent with a delightful narrative.


Movies bumped into above average, entertaining but unmemorable moviehood:

13 Going On 30
Mean Girls
50 First Dates
The Manchurian Candidate
Hidalgo

To be fair the movies that I haven't seen:

The Aviator
Finding Neverland
The Garden State
I Heart Huckabee's
The Motorcycle Diaries
The Notebook
The Phantom of the Opera.
Sideways
Vanity Fair

[tabuno]

Just when I think I have my top ten list down, there comes along like a few hours later on PBS the showing of Touching The Void (even on the small screen), this movie ranks 2nd on my list of top movies of 2004.