Movies of 2012 (Updated)

1. Haywire

Tom’s Top Ten Films of 2011

January 21, 2012

CinemaBeach Everything Else, Featured

When I look back at the year in cinema, I try to think about what really stood out. What films will resonate with me as time progresses? While numerous titles are already familiar to other lists, I am not prone to choosing a title just to seem educated. My list has a variety that includes pictures with sharp scripts, great set pieces, and four memorable performances by dogs. These are the films that I feel will stand the test of time and get me excited when the title sequence starts. These are the ten films that made me most excited to go to the theaters in 2011.

Super

While the Marvel Studio movies controlled the box office, it was director James Gunn’s superhero opus that walked away the winner with a large fraction of the budget. The dissection of caped heroes has never been more perverse or fun as watching Rainn Wilson assault people with a wrench. This is an achievement of proving that reading comics and acting on them will do little except crush your dreams.

Midnight in Paris

Director Woody Allen’s best work in recent years has been derived from his love of literature and foreign cities. What he manages to do here is combine the two into a love letter to Paris and the writers that inhabit its night life. He displays some of his sharpest humor and most fleshed out characters that reminds you why he’s one of the living greats.

Attack the Block

A stylized sci-fi horror movie that blends Basement Jaxx scores with British slang and creates the most entertaining 88 minutes of the year. Director Joe Cornish’s debut shows competence and pacing that chooses to challenge your expectations and reward you for sticking around.

50/50

No movie packed bigger emotional punches than this dramatic comedy that explored Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a young man with cancer. Writer Will Reiser’s honest look is so authentic and youthful that it manages to slip a few Predator references in without making it feel desperate. The real gem of this movie is Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who carries the movie through the good and bad moments with a sense of honesty and hope.

The Artist

While largely a love letter to cinema, it’s an ambitious story about finding your voice. Very few silent films get made nowadays, but it’s hard to imagine anyone doing a better dynamic than the whimsical score of Ludovic Bource, a human-like dog named Uggie, and actor Jean Dujardin, whose physicality is so top notch that without a single word can make you laugh or cry. It may not be in the leagues of Chaplin or Keaton, but to know this art form is still alive gives me hope that there’s still a market for it.

The Adventures of Tintin

It has been a disappointing year for animated movies until director Steven Spielberg finally unleashed this adaptation of the Herge comics. With assistance from composer John Williams and a dream list of British writers (Joe Cornish, Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright), he creates one of his most ambitious and fun movies in years. It may not be heavy on mystery, but it is a reminder that Spielberg can be transcendent without pandering to a single demographic.

Drive

This is quite possibly the most meditative, violent, nostalgic love letter to Los Angeles this year. By choosing to not be a high octane action movie, it instead succeeds at becoming a character study of one of the most ambiguous, desensitized characters of the year (Ryan Gosling). It wears the ambition on its sleeve and with director Nicolas Winding Refn’s pedigree for the less is more theory; it also comes across as the one movie about cars that even art house nuts can love.

Young Adult

It is likely that writer Diablo Cody made Charlize Theron’s character a doppelgänger for her career post-Juno. However, it is also Cody’s most mature and meta movie to date, delivering her traditional love of nostalgic pop culture references. With great performances, it manages to explore how growing up doesn’t mean maturing in hilarious and ambitious ways.

Hugo

While it is the lesser of the two cinema lover films this year, it doesn’t keep it from being one of the best period. Director Martin Scorsese’s dive into kid’s movies manages to bring his cinematic touches to a simple story while introducing children to the work of Georges Melies. With numerous call backs to films like Safety Last and A Trip to the Moon, this is the ultimate mesh of old and new cinema and a perfect gateway for any ambitious moviegoer.

Beginners

Based on experiences of director Mike Mills’ relationship with his dad, this is a humorous look into relationships and what it means to be open about it. With a brilliant performance by Christopher Plummer, this tale never loses its charm and instead packs every scene with plenty of heart.

Nerd's Eye View: Episode 54

Link

Nerd’s Eye View is proud to present Matt Benson, our official Game Master(or whatever title he decides on). Andrew observes The Iron Lady, Thom has A Mighty Wind, and Matt makes an offer with The Godfather. On the TV side, Matt visits Downton Abbey, Thom goes to the dogs with Terriers and Andrew spys on Archer. In video games, Andrew complains about Kinect for Microsoft. Benson officiates his first game with new entry “To Title the Truth.” The CBYHS theme is comedies and the results leave no one with laughter(okay, maybe a little). The Trailer Trash entries this week are The Innkeepers (2/3), Moonrise Kingdom (8/18), and Tim and Eric’s Billion Dollar Movie (3/3). Then everyone Guesses the Ending! Be sure to like us on Facebook , send us a tweet , and tell your friends. You can also read Thom’s reviews and Andrew’s articles . For updates on Benson’s Boombox, check him out on Facebook

Remember the Time

By Thomas Willett

NOTE: Before you read this piece, let me acknowledge that this is not intended to be a tirade against the latest Alexander Payne movie the Descendants. This is meant to dissect concepts presented in a recent event that I feel needs to be touched on. You will also notice a few comparisons to actor George Clooney’s last bout at the Oscars called Up in the Air. I have a deep love for that movie and still occasionally show bitterness to the Academy for giving the Best Picture award to the Hurt Locker instead. Also, in a year when themes of loss and family were better explored in Win Win and the Way, I feel some need to undermine the quality of a movie that I find to be nothing more than a competent family drama. I must also note that there is no beef with the staff of this movie as I am a big fan of Payne’s Election.

This past Sunday, the awards season had one of the biggest events. For many, the Golden Globes is considered to be the moment when we have a vision of what movies will stand a chance at the Oscars. There wasn’t much shock as the Artist and the Descendants won in the Best Picture categories. There wasn’t any great upsets, though my original bet of The Ides of March sweeping because of the Foreign Press Association’s love of politics was ill-informed. I think that it was mostly because I believe that Ryan Gosling needs some cred to not get duped by the Oscars after being nixed last year for his best performance to date (Blue Valentine).

What did I think of the choices? As you heard on the podcast and can infer from the opening paragraph, I was fine with most of them. I will praise the Artist (and Uggie especially) to no end and guarantee it will win big at the Oscars (even though my track record of picking winners has only been successful twice in ten years). I have numerous issues with the Descendants and the praise that it’s received, notably that it isn’t the best that this year had to offer.

When it won Best Picture, producer Jim Burke accepted the award and said:

“We had an extraordinary ensemble cast of young and older actors, veterans and newcomers, but our quarterback was George Clooney. Besides giving a career-best performance, in my mind, he was a generous actor who helped everyone do his best. So thank you very much, George. And if this movie becomes a timeless movie, which I feel like it will be to me, I feel like it’s because of our filmmaker and friend, Alexander Payne.”

I am fine with calling Clooney’s performance in the movie good, even comparing it to a quarterback (obscure Leatherheads reference?). I feel that the reason this movie works is because Clooney is restrained and dedicated enough to make it work. Even Shailene Woodley (who didn’t deserve that nomination) was good as the daughter.

However, the line that has bugged me for days has been towards the middle of that speech. Burke decided to state that this movie could be timeless. While I think that it is played off objectively, it is a bold statement that I have always believed is not meant to be answered by the creators. If anything, I believe that the question “Is this timeless?” should be answered by the influence that it gives to the future.

According to the Miriam-Webster Dictionary, the definition of timeless is: not restricted to a particular time or date. Is the Descendants, only one month in public consumption, already timeless? Are the themes explored strong enough to transcend generation and years to represent this era’s beliefs on how to cope with loss?

To answer that question, I decided to explore what other movies would be considered timeless. I started by finding out other writers’ thoughts on the issue. From the website Filmslate, R.C. Varenas explored the relationship between media and history in an article called ” Can a Film Ever Be Timeless ?” We perceive Shakespeare and Beethoven to be timeless masterpieces. No one questions them because they have been around for centuries and are almost universally recognized.

Then there’s movies, a medium that’s been around significantly shorter. Since the technology continually grows, most films have a dated feel. There are also movies we gain sentimental attachment to based on certain experiences. Besides film buffs, can films from any time be able to stand out as being extraordinary and universally recognized? Can they be as common as Shakespeare’s work?

Varenas refuses to establish a strong case for movies being at all timeless. However, I choose to argue that movies can become so. While some are continued through the ages by nostalgia, there are some that manage to reflect a period of time and not only tell a compelling story, but also move the field forward. It’s true that sometimes the technology doesn’t age well. No one can look at A Trip to the Moon and technically compare it to something modern like Prometheus. However, there is an indirect influence not only thematically that there are aliens on both voyages, but that it’s possible to imagine the George Melies film looking something like Ridley Scott’s and vice-versa if the times had changed. It’s also timeless because A Trip to the Moon reflects the beginning years of science fiction and as Hugo proved last year, that even with limited resources, the medium can be used to amaze.

Films don’t need to have advanced technology to amaze. Despite directors like James Cameron and Steven Spielberg using the medium to make visually stunning movies, there have also been movies that can qualify as timeless based solely on dialogue and performances. Charlie Chaplin created films like Modern Times that managed to mix slapstick humor and economic troubles into a funny yet poignant view of the world’s debt as well as the end of the silent film era. Star Wars showed that aliens and humans can get along. Rain Man showed that it is possible to make a respectable movie about autism. There are endless ways to go about making poignant films. However, are these timeless?

I personally feel that in order to be timeless, you need to not only be significant, but also be memorable enough to influence history. If it’s something iconic like simple plot twists like Alfred Hitchcock or use of John Williams score, you are in the running for timeless. It’s hard to properly judge Shakespeare because as Roland Emmerich’s Anonymous would have you believe; some people didn’t like his work. Would you be able to look at “Romeo and Juliet” back then and think that in 30 years, let alone hundreds, that it would still be remembered and quoted by bored high school students? No. Every medium has its fans and haters. Emmerich clearly hates Shakespeare.

The issue with calling any of these films timeless is arguably because of the root word: time. At best, we can look at the early days and see competence and the evolution. Simple camera techniques that evolved into what they are today. Even the point of view horror films of Friday the 13th are in some way inspirational of our society. It changes the way we look at movies. Films can only be considered timeless if they pave the way for something bigger. They need to be six degrees away from creating the next epic or drama.

Without A Trip to the Moon, I am sure many perceived notions about science fiction would not exist. We wouldn’t see a face in the moon or think of extraterrestrial beings that look like Sleestaks. We wouldn’t be able to get films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind if our interest never grew from that. We wouldn’t believe that comedy could mix slapstick and social commentary without films like Modern Times evolving into Woody Allen’s Bananas. If we didn’t have influence, nothing would seem possible. Are any of these timeless in the same vein as something from the 17th century? No. Times were different and so were the artistic demands.

However, can a film possibly be timeless to those who are not movie snobs? Yes. While it is mostly subjective to blockbusters and feel good movies, audiences have their own set of timeless movies because blockbusters too have grown. They probably won’t look at The Descendants and think much of it, but the brilliance of movies is that anything can be timeless if the era is reflected without ruining artistic integrity. Movies like The Deer Hunter and Taxi Driver are products of their time that are still cherished, yet both reflect the mental torture of the Vietnam War. In order to be a great film, art and story need to collide without being disjointed so that the creator’s voice and message can be understood and better remembered.

Are there timeless movies out there right now? Yes. However, we need to allow time to digest and decide if they really were the greatest thing ever. I am sure that 50/50 will be a very poignant movie for me, but I don’t know if it will be timeless. Movies that stick with you can be great, but eventually it becomes nostalgia. I feel that for my generation 50/50 is a reflection of growing old and facing life in an amazingly fresh and honest way. For my grandparents, it’s a movie with a dog named Skeletor , to whom the name means nothing.

Ultimately, the timeless movies are obvious. You hear the quotes. You see the shirts. Your grandparents are aware of it. These are films like Wizard of Oz or Star Wars. Films everyone has undoubtedly seen to some degree and remembered. Directors like Steven Spielberg are timeless as they have managed to become marquee names and become the expectation for excellence. However, films that paved the way for these guys are timeless in that they’ll never be forgotten as long as there’s film preservation and people who respect cinema and get joy out of the still camera set-up of A Trip to the Moon and understand how it influenced Prometheus.

I feel that Up in the Air has a chance to be close to timeless as I feel that it is reflective of the current economic world as well as how it isolates us all. Many would disagree, but I find that its use of computers to replace face-to-face contact says more about how distant everyone becomes. It also is genius in that it shows it from every angle. People getting fired throughout the movie reflect the common man’s despair, often resulting in thoughts of hopelessness and suicide. The people hired to fire people have to overcome personal emotions. This is something everyone can relate to and it’s done without being preachy about it.

Is the Descendants worthy of being timeless? No. For starters, a film’s influence should be recognized by the audience. Will we be citing any scenes from this movie in years to come? I don’t know that there’s anything that stood out. It’s a story about death that says little of interest to the human condition. It’s just a man trying to get along with his family. Win Win did that better. It’s about coping with death. The Way did that better. I don’t feel that the Descendants explored these issues in an interesting enough way to deserve the praise that it’s gotten let alone to be remembered as more than another movie. Even George Clooney’s performance doesn’t scream greatness.

In this age, it’s hard to predict what is timeless. All we have is initial reaction. We can find stuff that attaches to our core, but there’s no guarantee we’ll love it in five years. That’s the joy of movies. They can be subjective and even the greatest movies can be hated. To say the least, it’s impossible to judge a movie as timeless until at least five years pass. Even then, it’s also about where we’ve come as a society since then. Did Little Miss Sunshine pave the way for cinema today, and if so, what? These and many more questions should be used to define how timeless a movie really is.

You can read Thom’s blog every Wednesday and hear him on Nerd’s Eye View every Tuesday and Thursday at nevpodcast.com . Send your thoughts to nevpodcast@gmail.com. You can also read Thom’s movie reviews for Cinema Beach at cinemabeach.com .

A Lazy Lady

by Thomas Willett

11:00pm PST, January 17, 2011

Over the years, cinema has shown a lot of love for British royalty. This can best be seen in last year’s Oscar winner The King’s Speech, in which King George VI overcomes a speech impediment. What is it about the British monarchy that creates this fascination? Is it the accents, the scenery, or something deeper? From what has been seen, there hasn’t been too much to justify this phenomenon. This continues with director Phyllidia Lloyd’s The Iron Lady.

The story follows Margaret Thatcher (Meryl Streep) as she reflects on her life from a simple shop-keep to the first female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. While it starts off as a story meant to praise the power of women, it evolves into a more typical story of a leader and a society that dislikes her. If there is a central flaw, it’s that there is never an emotional attachment developed. This is most likely due to the beliefs of Thatcher in not mixing business with personal thoughts. It also creates a repressed character that appears to accomplish a lot, but leaves little to care about.

It is to be expected that Streep can deliver a great performance. Giving all her effort, she helps raise the movie with but a simple, charming accent. Her dedication shines in scenes where she is yelling at the congress with passionately worded phrases. Otherwise her range feels somewhat limited as the story progresses and requires her to be more restrictive. As a result, the movie fluctuates in quality, never setting a consistent tone and not really establishing a singular reason to give a damn.

However, if there is one shining star, it is Jim Broadbent, who plays Thatcher’s husband Dennis. While he comes across as insignificant to most of the story, the chemistry between Broadbent and Streep is excellent. His playful torment brings a comical touch and brings some humanity to a story destined to be an inauthentic history lesson. One can only wish that the writers would have realized his character and centered the plot around their relationship to make for a better story. For the most part, the emotional climax feels underwhelming due to the emotional limitations of the main character.

The one achievement of the film and its story is that it’s edited very well. After the chaotic work of J. Edgar, it’s nice to see a nonlinear story told in a way that doesn’t distract from the narrative. It presents each event in a clever way and ties in perfectly to the next scene. There is also actual news footage spliced in that helps to develop a more authentic vibe to the flashbacks. The score by Thomas Newman also provides vivacious energy that makes the parliament scenes feel lively and fun.

However, due to an unorganized tone, it is hard to see this as more than a movie about Margaret Thatcher. It doesn’t respect the subject well enough to develop as more than a retrospective spanning her 21 year career. Streep does the best she can to deliver writer Abi Morgan’s dense script in an entertaining fashion. The result is a forgettable, generic drama that says little.

The Iron Lady is a reminder that British politicians are just as interesting as American ones. It all depends on who is writing the story and what route is taken. If there is nothing interesting to say, why tell the story? Margaret Thatcher sounds like an interesting woman, but this plays as nothing but a survey of everything she did without the significance. It also sacrifices human elements as a result and leaves everything feeling cold. Despite good editing and a fantastic Jim Broadbent, there is little to restore faith that every British politician deserves a biopic starring an over qualified American actress portraying her.

Nerd's Eye View: Episode 53

Link

The Nerd’s Eye View crew opens episode 53 with a review of Moneyball. Special guest Matt Benson rejoins and adds his two cents. An overview of the Golden Globes finds everyone underwhelmed. Also included are the box office top ten, new releases on DVD and Blu ray and news. Send us email at nevpodcast@gmail.com and tweet us @nevpodcast . Thanks for listening!

Golden Globe Winners

Another year has come and the Golden Globes have been announced. Who won, who lost, and how did they stack up to my picks? Check it out here. Do note that my list greatly differed as the weeks lead up to the event. I fell in love with the Artist and I finally heard of A Separation. So, here is my list. Expect the Oscars and Razzies picks to pop up accordingly. 

Best Picture: Drama

Should: Hugo

Will: the Ides of March

Did: the Descendants

Best Picture: Comedy or Musical

Should: Midnight in Paris

Will: the Artist

Did: the Artist

Best Director

Should: Martin Scorsese, Hugo

Will: George Clooney, the Ides of March

Did: Martin Scorsese, Hugo

Best Actress: Comedy or Musical

Should: Michelle Williams, My Week with Mariliyn

Will: Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn

Did: Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn

Best Actor: Comedy or Musical

Should: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, 50/50

Will: Jean Dujardin, the Artist

Did: Jean Dujuardin, the Artist

Best Actress: Drama

Should: Rooney Mara, the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Will: Viola Davis, the Help

Did: Meryl Streep, the Iron Lady

Best Actor: Drama

Should: Ryan Gosling, the Ides of March

Will: George Clooney, the Descendants

Did: George Clooney, the Descendants

Best Supporting Actor

Should: Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Will: Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Did: Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Best Supporting Actress

Should: Octavia Spencer, the Help

Will: Shailene Woodley, the Descendants

Did: Octavia Spencer, the Help

Best Screenplay

Should: Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris

Will: George Clooney, Grant Heslov, and Beau Willimon, the Ides of March

Did: Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris

Best Foreign Language Film

Should: The Skin I Live In

Will: The Flowers of War

Did: A Separation

Best Animated Feature

Should: The Adventures of Tintin

Will: The Adventures of Tintin

Did: The Adventures of Tintin 

Best Original Score

Should: Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Will: John Williams, War Horse

Did: Ludovic Bource, the Artist

Best Original Song

Should: "The Living Proof," the Help

Will: "The Living Proof," the Help

Did: "Masterpiece," W.E.

Best Comedy TV Series

Should: New Girl

Will: Modern Family

Did: Modern Family

Best Actor, TV Comedy Series

Should: Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock

Will: Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock

Did: Matt LeBlanc, Episodes

Best Actress, TV Comedy Series

Should: Amy Poehler, Parks and Recreation

Will: Tina Fey, 30 Rock

Did: Laura Dern, Enlightened

Best Drama TV Series

Should: Game of Thrones

Will: Boardwalk Empire

Did: Homeland

Best Actor, TV Drama Series

Should: Bryan Cranston, Breaking Bad

Will: Bryan Cranston, Breaking Bad

Did: Kelsey Grammer, Boss

Best Actress, TV Drama Series

Should: Claire Danes, Homeland

Will: Claire Danes, Homeland

Did: Claire Danes, Homeland

Best TV Series: Miniseries/Movie

Should: Mildred Pierce

Will: Mildred Pierce

Did: Downtown Abbey 

Best Actor in a Miniseries or a Motion Picture Made for TV

Should: Bill Nighy, Page Eight

Will: Bill Nighy, Page Eight

Did: Idris Elba, Luther

Best Supporting Actor in a Series, Miniseries, or Motion Picture

Should: Peter Dinklage, Game of Thrones

Will: Peter Dinklage, Game of Thrones

Did: Peter Dinklage, Game of Thrones

Best Actress in a Miniseries or a Motion Picture Made for TV

Should: Kate Winslet, Mildred Pierce

Will: Kate Winslet, Mildred Pierce

Did: Kate Winslet, Mildred Pierce

Best Supporting Actress in a Series, Miniseries, or TV Movie

Should: Evan Rachel Wood, Mildred Pierce

Will: Evan Rachel Wood, Mildred Pierce

Did: Jessica Lange, American Horror Story

So, how did my odds stack up this year? Let's check the numbers.

Movie wins by

Should: 6/15 (40%)

Will: 6/15 (40%)

TV wins by

Should: 3/11 (27%)

Will: 4/11 (36%)

Verdict: A rather solid year, though the strongest section was definitely in the movies. In that section, I believe that I have the acting categories almost down. I just need to see where what I believe and what I know overlap and see what exactly made me think that way.  I believe that if I fine tune my voting for the Oscars, I will be able to ace the winners. Also, let's hope that the Artist beats the Descendants in the big categories.