What can I say? I love Bruce and the man loves the road. In (not quite) all seriousness, I was originally going to make a list of all of Bruce’s songs about night (“Something in the Night,” “Drive All Night,” “Prove it All Night,” “Night,” you get it!). But I soon realized he has even more songs about streets. So, without further adieu, the list we’ve all been waiting for…
Honorable Mentions
One Way Street – The Promise Wrong Side of the Street – The Promise Hitch Hikin’ – Western Stars
I have to admit I only listened to “One Way Street” and “Wrong Side of the Street” to write this list. Neither of which are bad. But they don’t rank at the top of Springsteen B-sides either. I like “Wrong Side of the Street” better. It’s fast and jangly. It feels like a less fleshed-out version of Springsteen’s top-notch B-Side, “Loose End.” Maybe it was the prototype?
While “Hitch Hikin'” doesn’t have a street in it, I mean come on. Where else are you gonna hitchhike? Though I guess the same could be said about “Drive All Night,” “State Trooper,” or “Cadillac Ranch.” Nevertheless, “Hitch Hikin'” is easily one of Springsteen’s best 21st Century entires. I can remember my first time listening to it. I fired up Western Stars on my way to work and couldn’t make it past the first song. The way the instruments build and build. It’s beautiful.
Dishonorable Mention
Further On (Up the Road) – The Rising I totally forgot about this song. It’s not very good.
14. Working on the Highway – Born in the U.S.A. Springsteen was incredibly particular while making Darkness on the Edge of Town and The River. There are dozens of good songs (and several great ones) left off each of these albums only because they didn’t fit in with his vision for them. Born in the USA is…not like that. Several of the songs are Nebraska leftovers. The rest feel a bit random. “Cover Me” was a song written for Donna Summer, for instance. “Working on the Highway” is pleasant enough. It’s a fun song to see live. It is just not essential.
13. Highway 29 – The Ghost of Tom Joad The Ghost of Tom Joad is Springsteen’s most underrated album. Probably because it has so little to do with the music he’s most known for. In fact, The Ghost of Tom Joad is just barely musical. The instrumentation is so muted that at times the album beings to feel like a spoken word piece. What I love most about “Highway 29” is how ambiguous it is. It’s Bruce at his most dreamlike. A song that feels more akin to Neil Young or Bob Dylan’s lyricism than his own.
12. Streets of Fire – Darkness on the Edge of Town “Streets of Fire” is my least favorite song on my favorite album. Make of that what you will. I really like the part where it gets 10x louder and Springsteen yells Streets of Fire / Streets of Fireeee!
11. The E Street Shuffle – The Wild, The Innocent, & The E Street Shuffle
While many albums have title tracks, I can’t think of many bands that have them. This song is all vibe. Springsteen clashed with his label over his debut. They wanted a singer-songwriter album. He wanted a band album. This song feels like a statement for the follow-up. It’s Bruce at his funkiest. There’s guitars, horns, and plenty of backing vocals. Everybody form a line.
10. Does This Bus Stop at 82nd Street? – Greetings From Asbury Park, N.J. This is Bruce at his most “I’m on one.” One could say that this song lacks the focus and restraint of his later work. I would argue that his later work lacks characters riding to heaven on gyroscopes. This was the first song David Bowie ever saw Springsteen perform. Take it from him: “The moment they kicked in he was another performer. All the Dylanesque stuff dropped off him and he rocked. I became a major fan that night and picked up Asbury Park immediately.”
9. Streets of Philadelphia – Single The 1994 Oscar winner! When I made this list I totally forgot this song. Not because it’s forgettable, but because it’s an outlier in Bruce’s career. It doesn’t appear on an album. It was made in the 90s, a strange and mostly lost period for Bruce. The sound is pretty different from the rest of his catalog. It very clearly doesn’t feature the E Street Band. But it’s still a pretty great song. The coolest story behind it has to do with the music video, directed by Jonathan and Ted Demme. Bruce recorded the vocal live for the video, feeling that lip-syncing would be too inauthentic for the subject of the song.
8. Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out – Born to Run
This is the fan favorite that’s never quite clicked for me. It was one of the four songs he performed at the Super Bowl! I will say that it easily has the best drop in Springsteen’s catalog (if for some reason that’s what you’re looking for in a Bruce song). Early live versions feature lots of Bruce’s white funk voice (which I love). Check out 3:26 of this version to hear him really hit one of these notes.
7. Wreck on the Highway – The River The River is an album based in conflicting ideas. Springsteen meant for the album to capture every part of life: love, heartbreak, life, death, community, and isolation. How do you end an album like that? I would argue that Bruce should have gone with his first instinct, the previously mentioned B-side, “Loose End.” How better to cap an album that opens with “The Ties that Bind?” Bruce elected to end it with “Wreck on the Highway,” a haunting ballad that details a man at a crossroads in life, driving home when he sees a fatal wreck. It’s made even more powerful on the album where it follows “Drive All Night,” a love song whose protagonist could very well be the dead man here. It’s this wreck that leads the narrator from the road back into bed with his baby. In other words, life and death all in one song. Eh? Maybe Bruce was right.
6. Highway Patrolman – Nebraska Early in his career, Springsteen used movie titles as benchmarks for his songs. Something for them to live up to. So while “Thunder Road” and “Badlands” take their names from films, they are not actually tied to the movies themselves. It was not until Nebraska that Bruce really started integrating film into his work. The album’s title track, for instance, is a narrative retelling of Terrance Malick’s Badlands. “Highway Patrolman” is not based on any source material but it is certainly cinematic. So much so, in fact, that Sean Penn later made a film based upon the song. “Highway Patrolman” is a wistful and meditative portrait of two brothers: One, the titular highway patrolman, and one, “Frankie…who ain’t no good.” And while the narrative is set up on these stark divisions, the song is about how thin the line between them can become. At the end, the narrator lets his brother drive away. The highway becomes the dividing line between them.
5. Incident on 57th Street – The Wild, The Innocent, & The E Street Shuffle This song is a Van Morrison-esque underworld fever dream. As far as I can make it, here’s the plot: Spanish Johnny, a gangster and possible sex worker, roams around the criminal underbelly of New York. He finds Jane, a possible client, sex worker, both, or neither, and falls in love. Meanwhile, the cops make a bust in the neighborhood. It’s getting hot. Then, late one night, Jane wakes up to see Johnny leaving. He’s going to make one more trick, deal, whatever. It seems doubtful that he’ll make it, but hey, that’s what makes him so romantic in the first place. To say that the music elevates this song is an understatement. It’s arguably the first of Springsteen’s great songs, complete with a transcendent outro. Good night it’s all right.
4. Out in the Street – The River The happiest Springsteen song! It is four and a half minutes of euphoria. Which for Springsteen is like, a ton. Even his happiest sounding songs (“Glory Days,” “Dancing in the Dark”) are tinged with regret. But not this one. It’s all about making it to the weekend. There is an unfortunate lyric about “giving the girls the eye,” which I don’t condone like at all. But besides that, pure joy! I think of The River as the album that best reflects the E Street Band’s ability. There isn’t a better showcase of that than this song. It’s so tight and fast, it feels like it’s hanging on a wire. A true reflection of their power as a live band.
3. Backstreets – Born to Run On another day, this might be number one. From the chilling piano intro to Bruce’s wails at the end, every part of the song is epic in scale. My favorite though has to be the bridge which is just totemic. I mean are there longer bridges than this?
Endless juke joints and Valentino drag Where dancers scraped the tears Up off the street dressed down in rags Running into the darkness Some hurt bad some really dying At night sometimes it seemed You could hear the whole damn city crying Blame it on the lies that killed us Blame it on the truth that ran us down You can blame it all on me Terry It don’t matter to me now When the breakdown hit at midnight There was nothing left to say But I hated him And I hated you when you went away
This song should also get props for its subject matter which is about the end of a relationship between two men. Springsteen has always maintained it’s a song about friendship. To which I ask, then why were they hiding on the backstreets? Whatever the case may be, it’s one of Bruce’s finest moments as a songwriter.
2. Thunder Road – Born to Run What can I say? It’s one of the finest songs ever written! One that encapsulates so much of the Springsteen ethos. It’s the terrifying and thrilling prospect of the open road. If you haven’t seen it, Jim Cummings made one of the greatest shorts I’ve ever seen centered on this song. While the studio version is unassailable, I have to say I’m partial to the Live 75-85 version which is just Bruce and his pianist, Roy Bittan.
1. Racing in the Street – Darkness on the Edge of Town Every piece I’ve read about this song mentions the same thing first. That the type of car Springsteen describes in the opening lines couldn’t exist. To them I say, that’s the point. “Racing in the Street” is a transformative ballad about a couple at the end of their rope. For the first two verses, the narrator describes a life of drag racing. How it’s brought him purpose, happiness, even his romantic partner. As he sings:
Now some guys they just give up living And start dying little by little, piece by piece Some guys come home from work and wash up Then go racin’ in the street
What makes this song profound is that Springsteen changes perspectives in the last verse. He details the woman’s increasing depression. For her, this tie to racing is not giving life, but taking it away. Darkness on the Edge of Town is an album full of characters in hopeless situations finding a way to keep pushing, however futile it may be. It’s an angry but ultimately resilient album. In this song, we already know that racing isn’t going to do anything for this couple. But we also know, it’s all this man knows how to do.
The song moves from this sentiment into an absolutely haunting coda. My favorite aspect of Springsteen’s songwriting is his lyricism. What sets “Racing in the Street” apart is that the musical outro not only tops his lyrical brilliance but transcends it. Especially in live versions, you can almost feel the car and this couple breaking free.
1st: Gangs of New York – Martin Scorsese (2002)
Watched at home. I really didn’t like the first half of the movie. I even considered just dropping out. Which was surprising. I thought the performances were terrific. Daniel Day-Lewis, Leonardo DiCaprio, and even Cameron Diaz are good. The tone and the story just seemed so silly to me. It’s noticeable right from the start. Scorsese begins in the crypts of the church in this cool dream-like opening in which the Dead Rabbits get ready for battle. And then they come outside and we get a really cool overhead of the American Natives as they emerge from their hideout. It’s brilliant! But then the actual fight is so hyper-stylized and just peculiar. It’s shot in fast-motion with these bizarre music queues. It almost reminded me of that modern Joan of Arc film. I think as you sink into the film it gets better. The tension of DiCaprio being undercover in Bill’s camp is excellent. It feels like a total precursor to The Departed. But then the movie falters again at the end. It feels so overstuffed. I understand that it’s supposed to be chaotic and cacophonous. Scorsese wants to show that these conflicts are happening everywhere, not just in the five points. But to include all the dead African-Americans and abolitionists here seems a little disingenuous considering the movie isn’t ever really about those issues. It felt like the right instinct in the wrong movie. I don’t know? I talked to Gioia about it after and she thought the movie is supposed to be campy. Which would explain a lot. But if it is, shouldn’t it be more fun? I realize I am griping a lot. That’s really because of the high expectation I had going in. It’s a 3-hour movie directed by Martin Scorsese. It has Daniel Day-Lewis and Leonardo DiCaprio. It features Liam Neeson, John C. Reilly, and Cameron Diaz in supporting roles. It has writing credits by Steve Zaillian and Kenneth Lonergan. This is a movie I’d love for Scorsese to try again. As for now, it’s just ok.
Grade: C+ Gangs of New York – Martin Scorsese (2002)
2nd: The Lighthouse – Robert Eggers (2019)
Watched at the Logan with Gioia. It is a filthy movie. Just absolutely disgusting. One thing I’ve really been thinking about is how the movie seems to thread this line between reality and surrealism. There are a lot of visions and flashbacks in the film. It feels kind of odd considering how grounded in history the film is. Not that these things can’t work together. In fact, I think that’s kind of the magic of this movie. But it’s strange seeing a really granular, detailed, historically accurate account of the operation of a lighthouse against visions of mermaids and Robert Pattinson’s past. In a lot of ways, this movie feels like a perversion of reality. One of the more interesting components to me was the sexual tension that exists. I think it’s natural to wonder about it from the outset. These two character are actually stranded on an island. And Eggers shows us the reality of the situation in completely unglamorous terms. We see the two characters masturbating at different times throughout the film. But what I think is really interesting, is that Eggers perverts this tension. We soon have Willem Defoe ejaculating down the stairs, inadvertently on Robert Pattinson. We have the two almost kiss in a drunken stupor. At the end, Pattinson drags Defoe into a pit like a dog. We’re made to wonder if there’s a sexual domination happening and whether it’s been happening through the entire film. I liked the way Eggers staged a lot of the mayhem in the movie. We see pretty normal scenes of the work on the island. It makes it that much more dynamic when the film turns in the last act. We get these same scenes but now the wheelbarrow is filled with rain and liquor. It’s totally maddening. On one hand, this is a film that I’m sure has layers and would be great for a rewatch. I didn’t totally pick up the flashbacks of the blond man that kept appearing. I presume he’s the man Pattinson killed and stole his identity. On the other hand, I really don’t have much interest in seeing this film for a while. It is a lot.
Grade: B+ The Lighthouse – Robert Eggers (2019)
3rd: Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith – George Lucas (2005)
Watched at home with Alice. This is supposedly “the good one.” Meant as either the least bad prequel movie or the “you know what it’s actually kind of good” prequel. It is definitely not the latter. I haven’t watched the first two prequels in a while, but if this is the “better one” it’s only in the sense that the other two movies are abominable. In fact, watching this movie, I was thinking that it’s kind of crazy that the prequel movies in general are this bad. They should (and could) be so much better. There’s so much story, plot, anticipation. The world and design of Star Wars literally begs to be explored. It just seems like all of Lucas’s instincts in executing it are wrong. His worst instinct his obsession with CGI. While the scope of this movie is impressive, it just doesn’t look like anything. It renders the whole film emotionless. I don’t feel any drama watching the Jedi battling General Grievous. It’s the same thing in the showdown between Darth Sidious and Yoda. It just looks awful. You can’t even really comprehend the mechanics of it. I think the battle between Obi-Wan and Anakin is pretty sweet and definitely redeems the film a bit. But it’s still so operatic and over the top. Aside from CGI, the real issue for Lucas is tone. I don’t necessarily even think the story of this film is bad. In fact, in some sense it’s already been vetted. We kind of know what has to happen. But Lucas lacks any nuance with his telling. An emperor becoming a tyrant is interesting. A prodigy being seduced by power is interesting. The way that love can corrupt and pervert is interesting. But these themes are handled so bluntly it’s hard to watch. We know Emperor Palpatine’s true identity from the first prequel. That none of the characters have figured it out by this movie is ridiculous. Likewise, a better film would position Anakin’s turn to the dark side as a result of the innumerable flaws of the Jedi. That’s the type of idea that makes The Last Jedi so good! Instead, Lucas just makes Anakin a whiny brat. It’s hard to have any sympathy for him or to understand the push and pull of his situation. The same is true with his and Padme’s relationship. If this is the crutch you’re putting his series-defining decision on, the relationship has to work. Like the rest of the film, it doesn’t.
Grade: D Star Wars Episode III – George Lucas (2005)
4th: Green Room – Jeremy Saulnier (2015)
Watched at home with Gioia. This is one of the most intense movies I can ever remember seeing. It is relentlessly gripping. I’m kind of blown away. Everything in the film is so methodical, tense, and well thought out. I really don’t think this film took any shortcuts or liberties which, given the premise, seems almost impossible. I loved how much this movie felt like a true, albeit nightmarish, experience. I really believe that this situation could happen. I think the way Saulnier inverts some horror tropes adds to the suspension of disbelief. For a while it seems like this movie could have a “final girl” sort of vibe. Alia Shawkat is a recognizable actress and carries most of the screen time at the beginning. The film feels set up for her to survive. And we get pretty close! She’s one of three members left and then she just dies. It’s intentionally de-stylized. The same goes with the other band members earlier. Their deaths feel inevitable and tragic. And because it’s in a horror movie, it feels almost more shocking. I think the more one digs into the movie and script, the more rewarding it’ll be. For instance, the opening scene is the band waking up in a field. They fell asleep at the wheel and fortunately glided safely to a stop. While being killed at a Neo-Nazi bar is certainly far more unlikely, it’s a similar outcome to what could have happened in the opening. Moreover, it’s something that could happen to anyone. I thought the mechanics of the incident and the way this bar and gang operates were similarly nuanced. Saulnier has all the answers but doesn’t give them to us. We know only as much as would be revealed if we were a fly on the wall. It’s great filmmaking! I even think the character development of the band is pretty good. We get a feel for how each member operates. I really am in awe of this movie. I can’t say I’ll watch it again anytime soon. It’s way too intense for that. But I’m excited to see whatever Saulnier does next.
Grade: A- Green Room – Jeremy Saulnier (2015)
5th: Snowpiercer – Bong Joon-ho (2013)
Watched at home with Gioia. Stylistically and thematically this is not my type of movie. I just have a hard time sinking my teeth into sci-fi. Especially in a dystopian setting. There are so many conceits you have to make. I understand all the analogs and metaphors this film is trying to make. I understand that our society already has massive class inequality. It’s just hard for me to buy into how a self-sustaining train would actually operate. Let alone that it could function as a grand design for balance and natural selection. What does this all mean? I’m not sure. I would just say that broadly, the heavy metaphorical stuff and especially the many twists at the end of the movie, don’t work for me. Something just doesn’t click. But I did like this movie! I think Bong Joon-ho is terrific. I loved the design of the train, the action sequences, the energetic and frazzled camera movements. There are some heavy-handed moments. The cigarette and the lighter are really worked over by the characters. Likewise, the low point of the movie comes down to an expository speech given by Chris Evans. It includes a lot of information the audience could probably guess at. I think what I wished is that this movie would have been much simpler. Just a straight train revolution/heist. Still, I think the big swings this movie takes mostly work. And given the subject matter and plot, that seems immensely difficult to do.
Grade: B- Snowpiercer – Bong Joon Ho (2013)
6th: American Psycho – Mary Harron (2000)
Watched at home. What a strange movie. Perhaps even more culturally than as an actual film. The closest analog I can think of is American Beauty. Another film portraying the perils of privilege. Both of these films feel distinctly pre-9/11. I think it’s a combination of being fairly modern while also being completely occupied with American privilege and wealth. For American Beauty, this becomes fairly problematic. Or at the least, inconsequential. We follow a man through his mid-life crisis as he obsesses over a young girl. Creepy! Okay back to this movie. It’s fine. At the very least, Harron is interested in some thoughtful questions about privilege, men, and violence. This type of movie and character is framed way better than say, Joker. Christian Bale is unbelievable in his role. It’s a remarkable performance that dominates the movie. I wonder if that also works against it in some parts. By centering so completely on Bale, it’s hard to shift to genuine horror. Characters like his secretary or the sex worker are more compelling to follow since they’re the obvious avatars for the audience. The more natural move would be to follow them through this horror. But instead, we follow Bale as he tries to kill them. It’s a hard thing to reconcile. What the film struggles with the most, at least to me, is having a coherent vision of what it wants to be. Take the end for instance. It is unclear if a) Bale’s character is having delusions instead of being a murderer or b) if everyone else is just ignoring that he is a murderer. These both present interesting commentaries on society. But they’re completely different ones. Is this movie about the reckless abandon of wall street or its cold-bloodedness? I don’t know. I’m kind of shocked this film has become such a cult movie. It struck me as almost completely average.
Grade: C+ / B- American Psycho – Mary Harron (2000)
7th: Rosemary’s Baby – Roman Polanski (1968)
Watched at home with Gioia. I had never seen it before. So many things hit you right away. Mia Farrow is stunning. It’s hard to take your eyes off of her. From the start, you’re completely on her side. She gives such an endearing performance throughout the film. She truly looks and sounds like she’s dying as she gets sick. In the final act, her paranoia is infectious. The movie is truly terrifying because of it. The plot is so smartly laid out. I love that Rosemary is completely right the entire time. That these people really are Satanists and they really are after her and her baby. A lot of similar-minded films try to focus the tension on the dynamic between paranoia and horror. I love that in this film there’s definitely a monster. We believe Rosemary is right. The tension comes from whether or not she’ll be able to escape. It’s what makes the scene with the doctor that much more wrenching. For a second I really believed he would help her. That he calls the husband and the other doctor makes total sense but it didn’t even cross my mind. I think the movie is overly long at some points. You could probably lose 10-15 minutes while Rosemary is pregnant. Still, every aspect from the acting to the design is done so well, it’s not the worst problem to have to spend more time in this movie.
Grade: A- Rosemary’s Baby – Roman Polanski (1968)
9th: Zombieland – Ruben Fleischer (2009)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s pretty good! It’s really fun. I think the cast is all dynamic. The jokes are funny. The general vibe and tone of the movie is perfect. I do struggle in movies in which the protagonist is so inept when it comes to girls. This movie definitely pushes right up against that limit. Some of Jesse Eisenberg’s desperation is hard to watch. Ultimately I think they make enough jokes at his expense that it’s not unbearable. While there are other emotions in the film, for the most part, it knows it’s silly and dumb. I wish I had caught the sequel while it was still in theaters.
Grade: B+ Zombieland – Ruben Fleischer (2009)
9th: I Love You, Man – John Hamburg (2009) Watched at home with Gioia. Kind of a perfect double feature with Zombieland. It’s the ten-year anniversary of both movies. Both are signaling a type of movie that wasn’t really made back in 2009, and definitely isn’t made anymore. They are high concept, big-to-moderate budget, studio comedies. Both have pretty standard scripts and just kind of plug in the comedy. I’ve watched this one, in particular, I don’t even know how many times. One of the things I’m always amazed at is how broad, yet perfect the script is. It’s like the most standard, formulaic plot ever. Yet all the nuances and comedy work so well. It’s a great movie. I just think that it works across the board. One of my takeaways this time was how good the cast is. It’s amazing they have J.K. Simmons, Andy Samberg, Aziz Ansari, and Jon Favreau all in small roles. It really elevates this movie. The best part of the movie is how awkward it is. I just can’t believe how far they lean into it. It’s so funny. Grade: A I Love You, Man – John Hamburg (2009)
10th: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre – Tobe Hooper (1974) Watched at home with Gioia. I had suggested Rounders. She said that this one might be more fun. I’ll post back when I see Rounders, but I didn’t find this one particularly fun. It’s really one of the scariest movies I’ve ever seen. It’s flat out gnarly. I did like it though. The way Leatherface just appears out of nowhere is terrifying. Most of this movie is honestly just chase scenes and it’s gripping. It’s really, really compelling. I think the way the movie looks, and the odd way the characters run all adds to it. Every aspect of the movie, even on a super low budget, is so well designed. Another thing that works particularly well about this movie is that they don’t explain any of it. There’s not any attempt to explain what the family is doing or how they work. And the movie does a good job of getting out. It literally ends just as the girl escapes. No follow up or anything. It’s exceedingly simple but perfectly done. Grade: A The Texas Chainsaw Massacre – Tobe Hooper (1974)
11th: The Thing – John Carpenter (1982)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s so good! Both Bryce and Mike had told me to watch it for the practical effects. They’re really something. Everything looks so terrifying and gross. To be honest, a lot of it does look silly. Which may sound at odds with the fact that I think it looks so good. But I really don’t think that’s a knock on what the film is trying to do. The “thing” is almost comically grotesque. Especially the way characters’ heads emerge from the thing as it assimilates them. It’s completely horrifying as a monster. What really blows me away about this movie is just the story. It’s so good! The fact that none of these people know who’s a “thing” and who’s not is brilliant. It’s truly one of the best alien/horror premises I’ve ever seen. It’s so gripping right from the beginning. I knew in the opening that there’s a reason that this guy is trying to shoot the dog. I knew that he didn’t actually just go mad. But I still couldn’t get myself to get on board with it. It’s a cute dog! So then when the dog transforms into “the thing” it’s terrifying! You understand the danger. And it changes the whole complexion of the movie. For the rest of it, you don’t mind seeing people killed and burned because you know that they’re not really people. It’s quite an accomplishment. My favorite part of the movie is when “the thing” emerges from the blood test. It’s one of the best jump scares I can ever remember seeing. It’s really crazy to me that this movie was ever not well-received. Even if you ignore the look of the movie (which is good), it’s still a great story.
Grade: B+ / A- The Thing – John Carpenter (1982)
12th: The Irishman – Martin Scorsese (2019)
Watched at the Landmark with Wills and Matthew. I’m not even sure where to start. I’m guessing this will be more like a running list of all my thoughts. I guess it kind of already is. Whoops! But the movie is too big and sprawling to really break down in any meaningful way. Especially after one viewing.
My main takeaway is that I was gripped the entire time. All 220 minutes of it. Which in itself is a feat. The movie is that compelling. It operates in the same way Goodfellas does. Scorsese is so good at bringing you into a world and just having you soak it all in. It’s so delightful. It’s really funny. The acting is phenomenal. It features great performances while at the same time winking at the fact that these people are all in this movie. Pacino is Pacino, De Nero is De Nero.
One of the more surprising things about this movie (to me) was that it wasn’t overly violent. In fact, while there were instances of violence, I would say this movie is more meditative than anything else. The movie does revolve around mob activity. And now that I’m saying it, I realize that Scorsese introduces most characters with an insert line about how they died. But to be fair, he also doesn’t show us most of these deaths. For the most part, the movie is Italian guys arguing over insults. It’s the threat of violence more than the actual instance of violence itself that prevails. That’s really interesting! This movie isn’t Heat, for instance. It’s far more interested in the politics of the mob than its actions.
Scorsese uses Frank Sheeran as the framing device for the film. As he meets Jimmy Hoffa, we realize the film will document Hoffa’s disappearance. In one sense, we begin to understand why we’re listening to Sheeran’s narration. On its surface, the movie seems to be a clear cut portrayal of what happened. There aren’t any narrative tricks. No character has a psychotic break. There isn’t a question of madness (or even dementia as the characters age). But this movie, by its nature, is framed through the lens of one man. Which calls his whole account into question. After Hoffa is killed, Sheeran recounts what happened to all the conspirators. He remarks how Hoffa’s son was an unknowing participant and got ten months for it. Yet, just before, Scorsese shows us a clip of Hoffa’s son helping to dispose of his father’s body. Now, it is possible that after Hoffa was killed, his son was forcefully roped into helping dispose of the body. What’s more likely is that this is a reflection of how Sheeran sees himself. He believes that he, like Hoffa’s son, was an unwilling participant. Even if Scorsese shows us that this isn’t true.
As TheIrishman wraps up, it centers itself on this question: How and why are we getting this account? In Goodfellas, our narration is framed through Henry Hill’s testimony. There is a reason he is telling us all of this information. Here, Sheeran’s reluctance to speak is what sets up the whole movie. Sheeran wins over Russell because he refused to rat about who he was hustling beef for. At the end of the film, at a nursing home, Sheeran still refuses to speak to the FBI. They remind him that everyone he knew, everyone we’ve met in this story, has died. He’s not protecting anybody by holding on to this information. As Sheeran laments about his estranged daughter Peggy to her sister, she asks pointedly what he did. He can’t even answer her.
There’s a suggestion at the end of the film that this has been a confession to a priest. Even if this is true, Sheeran doesn’t feel remorse about it. He goes through the motions of prayer but can’t come up with anything personal. What does this all mean? The movie sets up Peggy to be the figure for her father’s possible redemption. She’s seen through him the entire movie. She knows from the moment Hoffa disappeared that her father did it. But Sheeran can’t speak to her anymore. She won’t let him. There’s not any confrontation. Peggy, like Sheeran’s fellow teamsters and mobsters, has left him behind. In essence, this seems like a summation of the film.
For all of Sheeran’s actions, there’s been almost no personal consequence. The film breezes past his jail sentence. More importantly, unlike most major figures we meet, Sheeran is never killed. He never has to pay the capital price for his actions. And after all, that had been his role. He’s the guy who paints houses. He’s the killer. The film frames the end of his life as a purgatory. He’s left to wait by himself while everything of importance to him is gone. That we don’t know who the narration is for is Scorsese’s point. This is the guy who killed Jimmy Hoffa, and now the people around him don’t even know who that is. He entered this world by refusing to talk. Because he held on to that belief, he can’t come out of it. Whatever other life he could have had. One with his Peggy and his family, for instance, is gone. That’s the consequence for him.
Grade: A- The Irishman – Martin Scorsese (2019)
15th: The Martian – Ridley Scott (2015)
Watched at home with Gioia. She made the comment that it feels like a true story even though it’s obviously not. I totally agree. The storytelling is really something. It totally latches on to that feeling of “based on a true story” even if it isn’t. This really may be one of the best movies of the decade. It’s 2 and a half hours that just fly by. It’s so fun! I don’t know that there’s a ton to study or pick out of the movie. I think it’s just an extraordinarily well-done popcorn movie. I don’t mean to knock it in any way by saying that. It reminds me of something like The Shawshank Redemption in which by the end you’re totally moved and inspired. Matt Damon is incredible in this movie. Really everyone is. But Damon’s the perfect person for this role. He’s smart and cocky. Even though he’s in a dire situation, he has a swagger to him. I’m glad this movie doesn’t waste time giving Damon a false moment of despair or anything. The audience already realizes the stakes and odds against him. If I could change one thing, the Ares III spaceship doesn’t look great. I hate the way Jessica Chastain and others swim through the gravity-free ship. But that’s a minor bone to pick. Otherwise, this movie is just great.
Grade: A- The Martian – Ridley Scott (2015)
16th: Rounders – John Dahl (1998)
Watched at home with Gioia. I liked it! It’s totally the type of movie they don’t make anymore. The story and the stakes are really rooted in this small story. The story never takes us to Vegas or anywhere flashy. Like Turturro’s character, it’s content with just grinding it out and getting by. The cast is great. I can’t believe they have Damon, Edward Norton, John Turturro, and John Malkovich all in it. I think some of the storylines are a little uneven. The conflict with law school or the professor’s speech about becoming a Rabbi just feels very manufactured. It’s clear that they’re in there because this is a movie. Same with Damon’s girlfriend. Or how he keeps refusing to play poker again until, obviously, he does. Still, this is a movie after all, and even if those things are very obvious, they still get the job done. I think the acting is really what elevates this. All the characters, and especially the narration, just sell this world.
Grade: B Rounders – John Dahl (1998)
16th: The Talented Mr. Ripley – Anthony Minghella (1998)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s a weird one! The first half of the movie is completely different from the second half. It does very much feel like a novel in that so many things happen. I think overall, the movie works pretty well. It’s mainly due to the actors and the setting. Why wouldn’t I want to watch a movie with Matt Damon, Jude Law, Phillip Seymour-Hoffman, and Gwyneth Paltrow in 1950s Italy? It’s outstanding. I have to emphasize that Jude Law looks unbelievable in this movie. He is obscenely, comically handsome. Which is totally necessary for the role too. We’re supposed to be infatuated by him. This movie is not particularly subtle, but it hinges on moments that are. I think it must be really complicated to set up Ripley’s homosexuality, his love for Dickie, and his impulse for violence all in the first half of the movie. And that’s all while the characters are supposed to be having a grand time. It’s a lot of things to balance. But this movie does it. I’m curious if there was any backlash to this portrayal of a gay character. Especially in the fact that he’s a serial killer. I didn’t find it to be especially problematic but it reminded me of the controversy surrounding Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs to some extent. This movie is pretty long. Towards the end, it feels like things are happening just because they happened in the source material. I mean, I really don’t understand why Dickie wouldn’t book it when he’s getting framed for murder. He has a totally different identity. I also find it hard to believe that Dickie’s father would let him off the hook so completely.
Grade: B The Talented Mr. Ripley – A. Minghella (1999)
16th: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story – Gareth Edwards (2016)
Watched at home. It’s really, really good. It might be the best non-OG Star Wars movie. It starts out a little slow. The movie has you latch onto these characters before you really have a reason to. We have an attachment to Jyn because we see her separated from her family by the Empire. But after that, she’s totally ambivalent about what’s happening. She’s not interested in the rebellion. Cassian and K2SO are her captors at first. However, once Galen is killed, this movie is on a roll. We have our team now. We’ve always known the importance of the mission. This is a prequel after all. But now we have more reason to root for our team. They’re people that have had to give up everything, even what they believe in, to do this. I think it works doubly for the movie that the Rebellion doesn’t sanction the plan. Jyn and Cassian become true rebels. The last 45 minutes of this movie are glorious. It’s flat out incredible. Each of our characters gets a heroic moment. They do something that the rebellion needs, and then they get killed. They’re making the ultimate sacrifice. My favorite moment is the blind man walking out to turn the switch. It takes your breath away. It’s during this sequence when we realize that none of these characters will survive. Especially not Jyn or Cassian. It’s gutting. But it’s what was required of them. The ending sequence with Vader chopping through Rebel soldiers is magnificent. What a stunning moment. I love it.
Grade: A- Star Wars Rogue One – Gareth Edwards (2016)
17th: The Matrix – The Wachowskis (1999)
Watched at home with Gioia. I had, shamefully, never seen it before. My biggest takeaway is how well the story works. It’s so rooted in sci-fi and everything else, I don’t know, I guess I expected there to be some holes. But everything is pretty well set up and explained. I think the thing that sets this movie apart is actually the dialogue. So much of it has to be expository but it feels like the characters are giving you just enough information in a natural way. I think things kind of fall off at the end. I don’t really buy that Trinity falls in love with Neo. Or that the solution to everything is that Neo just figures out he’s really good at Kung-Fu. Still, it was pretty fun. I definitely get why it was such a huge sensation.
Grade: B The Matrix – The Wachowskis (1999)
17th: Gattaca – Andrew Niccol (1997)
Watched at home with Gioia. A long-awaited movie for me. It’s great! It’s such a cool story and premise. I especially love how low-budget the movie is. It reminds me of something like Green Room in which its financial constraints become its biggest asset. The reason it works so well here is that it forces the movie to root itself in human conflict. Even though the film is set in a dystopian future at a space program, the conflict all comes from the characters. It’s about whether or not Vincent can keep his ruse up. Whether his pure dedication is enough to overcome all the odds, genetic and otherwise, against him. The script is really outstanding. I love how small the scope of the movie is. Particularly, that Vincent is never in space. The first act is an explanation of this society and his situation. The second act is the murder investigation, and the final act is whether he can make it on this mission. The twists work really well. That the investigator is Vincent’s brother is brilliant. It ties everything together. If I had a bone to pick, I think the climax of the film being a swim race is a little silly. But I don’t know how else the movie would revolve itself. The cast is fantastic. I don’t know if they just lucked out, or spent all their money on it. But Ethan Hawke, Uma Thurman, and Jude Law are all fantastic. Same with Alan Arkin. It was cool too to see Gore Vidal and Dean Norris too. Ethan Hawke is really, really good in this movie. I don’t know if he’s ever been better. He has to convey so much emotion in tight spots. He’s technically undercover the whole movie. I think this movie is an all-timer for me. I was really blown away.
Grade: A- / A Gattaca – Andrew Niccol (1997)
20th: Who’s That Knocking At My Door – Martin Scorsese (1967)
Watched at home. It’s so fascinating. I can’t start anywhere else but with Harvey Keitel. He’s obviously done pretty well for himself. Still, I almost lament the fact that he didn’t arrive sooner. He’s so charming. He’s got this boyish wonder to him. It’s almost like Christian Slater. I really was just hypnotized by him. The other major thing I noticed is that Scorsese almost arrives fully as himself. The opening is gang violence set to pop music. This film is really made by the music he sets it to. J.R. and the girl’s love story is mostly told through music. At the midpoint, we get this crazy scene in which J.R. has sex with a woman set to “The End” by the Doors. The movie is all about sexual repression and how it manifests itself in harmful ways. The end is about a man coming to grips with Oedipal urges. It’s so perfect. It’s almost too on the nose.
The movie obviously hinges on a pretty complicated subject. The girl reveals that she was raped and J.R. can’t handle it. He has pretty much the worst reaction you can have. He puts all of the blame on the girl and leaves her. Now, through the first half of the film, I was really suspect of the portrayal of this relationship. Their falling in love hinges upon J.R.’s ability to charm the girl while mansplaining movies to her. It seemed kind of weak at the time. But! I think it’s kind of perfect for what Scorsese is poking at. J.R. isn’t just charming. His charm is a mask for the shitty person he really is. So if these scenes feel vaguely nice but pretty empty, it kind of adds into the movie.
After the girl reveals she was raped, I had a hard time watching. We see J.R. just go on a bender with his gang. It’s supposed to be uncomfortable, but Scorsese needs to show him having a good time. It’s just hard to watch. Later, when he arrives at her apartment, I was baffled by how she could be so gracious to him. Obviously, he blows it, and Scorsese ends the movie with him being in the wrong.
I liked this movie quite a bit. Certainly a lot more than I expected to. It’s pretty slow, and there’s not a whole lot in terms of story. Scorsese really uses music and montages to stretch the movie to 90 minutes. Still, it has a distinct voice and is saying something. In his own words, it’s “Cinema,” even if it lacks the polish of his later films, or say a Marvel movie.
Grade: B+ Who’s That Knocking at My Door – Martin Scorsese (1967)
21st: The Hurt Locker – Kathryn Bigelow (2009)
Watched at home. I think it works really well as a film. I obviously can’t comment on its veracity or accuracy depicting 2004 Iraq. It looks amazing though. The movie starts with a really tense sequence in which the unit attempts to disassemble a bomb. It ends with this massive and pretty stunning explosion. In a lot of ways, it illustrates the tension of the whole movie. You have these really grand and deadly explosions contrasted with shaky camera work. The movie is about the push and pull of war. Of its addictive and deadly nature. Of its glamorous and unglamorous sides. Throughout the movie you get a really complicated picture of all three characters in the unit. James (Jeremy Renner) is rash and dangerous. He’s also the best. Later, in a shootout, he proves to be encouraging and caring of Owen. Sanborn (Anthony Mackie) seems like the perfect soldier through the first act. He’s calm and in control. He wants to operate by protocol. He lashes out at James for putting them at risk. Over the next act though, we see that he’s as unnerved as anybody. He makes a comment to Owen about killing James. Later, when they’re fighting he holds a knife to his throat. The climax of the movie is him confessing that he’s afraid to die, that he hates it. Owen is probably the closest we get to an audience avatar. At least for me. He’s terrified and despondent about the war. He keeps his cool for the most part in the field, but at the base, he’s a wreck. For him, the movie ends with him cussing James out. He forgives Sanborn but not James. What does it all add up to? I think a fairly compelling portrait of what war does to people. Of the human cost of sending troops to battle. That it’s all grey and unpleasant. If I have an issue with this movie, it’s that it doesn’t really move me. I find all three characters to be fairly unsympathetic. For the most part, this movie just feels like a bummer, even if it’s really well made. I’m kind of shocked it won best picture.
Grade: B- / B The Hurt Locker – Kathryn Bigelow (2009)
22nd: Booksmart – Olivia Wilde (2019)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s very funny. Most of the jokes really work. The cast is incredible. Beanie Feldstein and Kaitlyn Dever in particular really carry the movie. But as a movie, I think it barely works. Everything that happens is so outlandish, it was hard for me to take any stakes of the movie seriously. Which is fine when the movie is just trying to be funny. Because it really succeeds at that. But any time the movie tries to work in anything deeper, I think it gets shaky. Take for instance the relationship between Molly and Amy. The low point of the movie is supposed to be their fight at the party. It’s hard to believe it would happen. It’s only in here because this is a movie and there has to be a low point. I think that’s the main issue with Booksmart as a movie. So many of the plot points feel telegraphed. We know how it’ll play out as soon as it’s hinted at. I felt that way as soon as they got Jessica Williams’ character’s phone. The same thing with the charging cord in the uber. Luckily, these jokes are so funny and enjoyable, they still work. But it feels not as surprising or as delightful as it could have been. Overall, I liked this movie but it was certainly below the high expectations I had for it.
Grade: B / B- Booksmart – Olivia Wilde (2019)
23rd: Spring breakers – Harmony Korine (2012)
Watched at home with Gioia. It is a deeply uncomfortable movie. I was really surprised. I guess I thought it was supposed to be fun. Especially after seeing something like Beach Bum. This movie is zero fun and unlike Beach Bum, this movie seemed to have a real message and purpose to it. I was fairly surprised. I definitely like what Korine is getting at more than the movie itself. Korine, to me, seems like someone interested in documenting life. To show what existence feels like for different people. Now, his subjects happen to be bums and trash humpers, but still. I found this movie to be in line with his others in that it’s an exploration of a certain type of person and lifestyle. It may seem exploitative on its surface, but I think Korine’s response would be that this all happens. Moreover, his portrayal of this lifestyle isn’t fun at all. It’s completely unsexy (a feat considering how much nudity is involved). Gioia made a really good observation that he’s exploring something interesting with race in the film. The girls are all white, and we learn from Alien that he’s the only white boy who’s actually from there. In other words, Spring Break could be seen as a white invasion of a Black community. And this plays out in the film. Selena Gomez’s character is having a magical time during spring break. When the only thing that changes is the race of the people around her, she wants to go home. What’s more, the movie ends in a shootout in which the girls massacre the gang and entourage of Alien’s rival, all of whom are Black. I do think these things make the movie worth it. It’s kind of an interesting use of an exploitation film. Does it mean I’ll watch it again? Absolutely not.
Grade: B- / B Spring Breakers – Harmony Korine (2012)
27th: Stockholm – Robert Budreau (2018)
Watched on my flight from Chicago to Boston! I liked it a lot. I’m a bit surprised by the mediocre reviews. I think the movie is pretty well done, really fun, and trying to do something interesting. The source material for the film is a bank heist in which the hostages became sympathetic toward their captors. You know, Stockholm Syndrome. This movie does a really good job of making you root for Ethan Hawke and Mark Strong’s characters. And you shouldn’t. They’re clearly in the wrong. But I think their performances are so charismatic it’s hard not to root for them. They’re charming but kind of bumbling. They’re good, but not masterminds by any means. Meanwhile, Noomi Rapace is so endearing. I don’t think the movie works without her performance. You need her to be able to buy into the premise. She has to effectively portray someone who’s shifting allegiance to her captors because of this event. Lastly, I have to mention the gospel era Dylan soundtrack. Fantastic.
Grade: B+
29th: The Witches – Nicolas Roeg (1990)
Watched at home with Gioia. To be fair, we only got to watch the first half of this movie. But I’ve seen it before so I’m counting it here anyway. It’s so fun, weird, and delightful. It makes a lot of sense that Roeg directed it. The thing I was most impressed by was its pacing. All of the set up is in the first act of the film. It’s a little slow, but not bad. They’re laying a lot of groundwork. Everything from the witches, to the mice, to the boy’s parents dying. What I think really works is that when the second act starts, we’re just in it. There’s not a close call with the witches or anything. The convention starts, they find the boy, and he becomes a mouse. It’s a thrilling sequence.
29th: Knives Out – Rian Johnson (2019)
Watched at the Nickelodeon with Gioia. It’s up there for my favorite movie of the year. I thought it was so, so good. I haven’t even seen that many whodunnits and this still felt like such an amazing inversion of those tropes. I think the most impressive part of the movie was that it was able to have social themes and a strong message in it. And it felt effortless (I’m sure it was not). I don’t mean to knock other films, but I think movies like Black Panther, Captain Marvel, or even Johnson’s last film The Last Jedi, aren’t able to integrate their social messages as well as this movie does. Obviously, there is a lot more pressure on those movies to do so. But I was really blown away by this one. Daniel Craig and Ana de Armas steal the movie. They’re so good in it. I really just think this was one of my favorite movie experiences in a while. It was so fun.
Grade: A
30th: Where’d You Go, Bernadette – Richard Linklater (2019)
Another in-flight movie! This movie’s not bad. I think we are taking Linklater for granted. I think we’re taking Cate Blanchette and Billy Crudup for granted. And the performance from Emma Nelson is wonderful. Do I understand why most people didn’t think the movie worked? Sure. It’s uneven at best. And it’s a slow start. The narrative feels shaped by a book (which it is). Still, the acts of the film feel a bit disjointed. You wait most of the movie for Bernadette to disappear. But it’s a balancing act. You need to spend time with her to understand how and why she would disappear. But once she does, it’s the best part of the movie. I think the Kristen Wiig part is a little too much. They have to set up the tension with her and resolve it really quickly. But I loved the sentiment of the movie. Linklater is really such a humanist filmmaker. I think he can’t make a movie without showing the best sides of everybody. I find it totally endearing. And I think it makes the ending work really well. I was moved.
Grade: B
1st: The Third Man – Carol Reed (1949)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s a towering achievement. A true classic. An actual masterpiece. Almost every aspect of the film is striking. It’s that dynamic. The visuals, to start with, are incredibly cool and hyper-stylized. Most shots are set askew. The film literally knocks the viewer off balance. Moreover, Reed makes extensive use of light and shadow, angles, and locations. There are several shots in this film that have been done over and over to the point that it’s beyond homage or ripping off. The most famous shot being the enlarged shadow on the wall. I think one of the things that really sets this film apart is the choice of locations. Aside from its thematic significance, post-war Vienna looks great. It’s not a city that I’ve seen in many films. On top of that, Reed chooses to shoot at places that will look incredible. We have scenes at the Ferris Wheel and in the sewers. Even though it’d be impossible, I felt I had a sense of geography and how one moves about the zones. What else? The score is so good! It’s light and bouncy. A perfect contrast to the action of the film. I’m so glad they didn’t use any hyper-dramatic orchestral pieces as the theme. The acting is arguably the most acclaimed part of the film. All the actors give great performances. Particularly the woman who plays Anna. Orson Welles has to come in the third act to deliver a performance of pure evil. And he does it. My favorite aspect of the film is its thematic structure. The movie is centered on Holly arriving in post-war Vienna and chasing a ghost. Moreover, this ghost turns out to be death himself. A bringer of pure evil. He steals penicillin for profit. Meanwhile, the other characters occupy various roles. Some try to live in this fractured city. Some turn a blind eye. Others futilely pursue him. Throughout the film, you have characters poking fun at Holly’s profession. He’s a writer of cheap novels, cowboy stories. A character asks him what he thinks of stream of consciousness writing. Another asks him about James Joyce. These are Europeans who scoff at Holly’s earnestness. The idea that you can simply write a book about good guys and bad guys. Yet, here is Holly trying to do just that. The last scenes of the film return to Harry’s funeral. Reed takes the same shots used at the opening of the film. While we trust Holly and are led to believe that Harry is dead, the film doesn’t show us a body. Based on what we just watched, that should make us suspicious. As the viewer, you have to reckon with the information you’ve been given and decide if you trust it. You’re put to the same test as Holly. To see if this city has broken your belief system.
Grade: A The Third Man – Carol Reed (1949)
2nd: Ponyo – Hayao Miyazaki (2008)
Watched at home with Gioia. Along the way, I knew one of these Miyazaki films would disappoint me. Not in any major way, but just be a notch below their reputation. Ponyo was that film for me. Ironically, there are aspects of this film that are the best that Miyazaki has done. I think visually, this is an incredible achievement. It’s maybe his most immersive film. There are so many shots, especially of the water, in which you take for granted how stunning and detailed everything is. It’s definitely his cutest film. The ten-minute stretch in which Ponyo first becomes human is beyond delightful. It’s up there with any portion of his work. I also love the eccentricities of the characters. Ponyo’s dad is so weird and androgynous. Sōsuke’s mom is a maniac. These decisions elevate the characters beyond what their stock traits would normally allow. Okay. So that’s obviously a lot of praise for a film that disappointed me. To be clear, I still enjoyed it. I just felt that the story was a bit thin. I think the character of Ponyo could have been developed more. You don’t really learn why she’s so desperate to become human. Once she is human, she seems just to live for food. I think Sōsuke is really charming. But he isn’t given much of a reason to love Ponyo besides the fact that she does magic. There’s a part when Ponyo and Sōsuke sail off and I realized that they don’t have anything to say to each other. The film kind of acknowledges this too. They literally don’t say anything to each other. I guess that’s what I feel the issue with Ponyo is. It’s cute, funny, and everything on the margins is really well done. I just don’t think it has much to say.
Grade: C+ / B- Ponyo – Hayao Miyazaki (2008)
3rd: Ad Astra – James Gray (2019)
Watched at the Logan with Gioia and Wills. This was maybe my most anticipated film of the year. The trailers looked incredible. It really felt to me like it would become a new classic. That is decidedly not the case. For better or for worse, Ad Astra doesn’t have much interest in being a classic or ultra-popular movie. Instead, it is a painstaking exploration of what a journey to Neptune to find one’s father would actually be like. For some aspects of the film, I think this works really well. I loved Gray’s imagining of Moon travel and of the colonization and political turmoil that future space exploration could become. These elements felt really clever and thought out. I don’t doubt that this is what the future could look and feel like. My issues with this film are that they are so rooted in these details, it feels like there is little life. Brad Pitt, by design, doesn’t have tangible emotion. He is a one-note character. A calm, cool astronaut who’s life has been fucked up from the absence of his father, but who refuses to acknowledge this pain. I don’t think it’s an uninteresting theme. In fact, I think where the film lands is a worthwhile thought. The film doesn’t feel like it has any other way of exploring these issues. It’s just layers of narration, psych evals, and thoughts while Brad Pitt travels alone to space. In between, there are some really amazing set pieces and action sequences. The opening disaster, the baboon, the moon rover fight, and the death of the astronauts is great. Between these moments, I think the film suffers. I’m starting to think that maybe James Gray makes a different type of film than what I would like. Between this and Lost City of Z something just isn’t clicking. I almost appreciate and admire his work than I actually like it.
Grade: C+ / B- Ad Astra – James Gray (2019)
4th: Joker – Todd Phillips (2019)
Watched at the Logan with Gioia, Wills, Beronica, and a couple of their friends. Any type of discussion around this film feels fraught and overly-complicated. As just a movie, I thought it was well-made, featured great performances, and had a pretty cohesive story. I thought the themes and messages of the movie (intentional or not) were complete garbage. The most concisely I can sum this up is at the end of the 2nd Act when Arthur has fully become Joker. We get a scene in which he dances on top of a staircase to Gary Glitter’s “Rock and Roll Pt 2.” It’s awesome. It is also complete trash. There’s no need for the scene except as an injection of excitement into the movie. Phillips could have chosen any song he wanted for the moment. It’s literally a moment that is outside what is happening within the film. Yet, he chooses a song that most people have stopped using because it was made by a pedophile. I reject the idea that art is responsible for putting dangerous or violent notions into society. Any type of argument about whether Phillips or Phoenix are responsible for the proliferation of “dangerous ideas” is stupid. It’s the same arguments that were made about Do the Right Thing. But I do think, that as art, films are responsible for having a cohesive message. Some sort of meaning or ethos behind their work. If the Joker has one, it doesn’t seem coherent to me. It seems Phillips is lashing out at the general public’s undirected anger and making a case for where it could lead. If that’s the movie’s message, perhaps it’s a relief that I don’t think Joker is problematic. I do think that it’s bad.
Grade: D Joker – Todd Phillips (2019)
6th: Castle in the Sky – Hayao Miyazaki (1986)
My second to last Miyazaki film. With the assumption that Totoro will be good, this is Miyazaki’s worst movie. The fact that this is still, at worst, an average film is quite impressive. And it does feel interesting as an early work. Castle in the Sky has many of the traits you would expect from an early work. It’s overly complicated, long, and uneven. The characters don’t pop as well as they do in later films. While the idea, story, and theme are all certainly there, it’s unpolished. It’s unrefined. I think aside from the animation, it’s hard to praise this film above any other Miyazaki work. All of the film’s other traits are done better in later works. The animation here is worthwhile just for how ambitious it is. Lupita, in particular, is stunning to behold. The imagination and execution behind it reveal that Miyazaki is a master.
Grade: C / C+ Castle in the Sky – Hayao Miyazaki (1986)
7th: American Gigolo – Paul Schrader (1980)
Watched at home with Gioia. I thought the look and feel of the movie were the best things about it. The film feels like a total embrace of the 80s even if it is just the beginning of the decade. Every location has strong, vibrant colors. It is hyper-stylized. Schrader does a really good job using Richard Gere’s looks in this setting. He’s dressed impeccably. We get montages of him buying expensive suits. We see him drive in a convertible around LA. It’s great. Ironically, where I think the movie falls short is the writing. A strange circumstance for Schrader. The film revolves around a murder. One that we learn Gere’s character is being framed for. But these details feel implicit and buried beneath the themes of the film. You get the sense that Schrader is more interested in what it means to be a sex worker in society, the price you have to pay for luxury, and the cost of intimacy. These are worthwhile explorations for sure, but they come at the cost of the actual story. I think this is most evident in Gere’s portrayal of his character. He is intentionally blank. He is shown not to be an exciting lover but a tender one. Schrader wants him to be a baby. To be naive even in his line of work. In theory, it’s an intriguing idea. But Gere comes off as boring and unsympathetic. As the film winds down, it’s all a bit anti-climactic. The full effect of the story, and therefore the film, is somewhat muted by Schrader’s interest in other questions.
Grade: C+ American Gigolo – Paul Schrader (1980)
8th: Eyes Without a Face – Georges Franju (1960)
Watched at home with Gioia. The physical horror in the film is outstanding. The reveal of Christiane’s faceless head is terrifying. What is scarier, which she even says, is when she wears her mask. There is something so totally unsettling about it. I thought whoever was cast in the role was terrific. She is so skinny. She also moves in an unusual way. She glides about the room. It seems more spirit-like than human. I noticed that she’s always wearing long dresses or gowns and the camera doesn’t show her feet. The gliding is intentional. She’s meant to look like a ghost. Likewise, I think some of the questions that the film hints at are really interesting. What does it mean to not have a face? What would the psychological toll be of seeing someone else in the mirror? In fact, I think these questions are more interesting than a lot of the film. There are some unusual decisions that are made just for the sake of the movie. For instance, the fact that the doctor is only interested in blonde, blue-eyed girls. Not being a face transplant expert, I would assume these are the two details that wouldn’t matter. I understand that it’s probably to gauge if it would be appropriate for his daughter. But at this point, she doesn’t even have a face. It just feels like a device so the cops can have something to latch on. Likewise, the cops and their plan are completely idiotic. They just leave that girl behind! It leads to the best scare of the movie. Of her waking up to see the faceless daughter. But it’s so silly. And then, the cops plan just fails. They’re total pushovers. It’s left up to the daughter to free the patient and unleash the dogs. Still, I thought it was pretty fun and truly haunting at parts. Glad to see this classic.
Grade: C+ / B- Eyes Without a Face – Georges Farnju (1960)
9th: Persepolis – Marjane Satrapi & Vincent Paronnaud (2007)
Watched at home with Gioia. I really liked it. I found it incredibly moving and informative. Not just in the sense of learning facts and data. Though I did learn a lot about the Iranian revolution. But it gave me perspective on a country and a conflict I had never really thought about. Watching the film, I gained a new level of perspective on subjects like immigration or life in Iran. More than anything, I think this film thrives in its humanity. One of the things that delighted me most was the characterization and eccentricities shown in Marjane’s family. That Marjane’s grandmother could be so funny and profane was surprising to me. I thought the scenes where her family goes to parties are really humanizing. It’s easy as an American to think of people from Iran as a stereotype, even if you don’t mean to. I certainly had a bias of thinking of them as being very formal and pious. But this movie shows that despite whatever the government is, people are individuals. Humanity exists everywhere. Even if Marjane’s family had been ultra-conservative, or buttoned up, they’re still individual people with independent thoughts and feelings. There’s a really powerful scene in which a neighbor puts on her veil when Marjane’s father comes home. The neighbor explains that’s just how she was raised. I think Marjane’s rebellious streak and individuality serve the movie well. She’s an incredibly charming protagonist. But the movie notes that her life would still have equal value even if she had been raised like her neighbor. As much as this is a film about Iran, I thought the most powerful parts were when Marjane goes to Vienna. It’s really jarring to see how she is treated by Western culture. I was confronted with the fact that the people in Vienna don’t even see her. It’s a lesson to take to heart in everyday life. I think living in Chicago I get so accustomed to being in a crowd and just ignoring everyone. This film does a great job of exploring how privileged it is to even be able to do that. Persepolis works in the way great art does. It tells one story perfectly and in doing so, it’s able to extend its scope way beyond. It’s a film about Iran that is universal.
Grade: A Persepolis – Marjane Satrapi & Vincent Parounnaud (2007)
13th: El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie – Vince Gilligan (2019)
Watched at home, partially with Gioia. In many ways, it’s the ultimate TV movie. I think your enjoyment of the film will be a 1:1 correlation with your enjoyment of Breaking Bad. This film does not work if you have no knowledge of Breaking Bad. The film also operates in the way the show did much more than the way a typical movie does. We follow Jesse through what feels like three compressed episodes of Breaking Bad. In the show, Gilligan would meticulously show what his characters were doing before unveiling the central dilemma. It works in a tv show because these instances are short and contained. We are compelled to the mystery, get a deeper level of the story with a reveal, and return for the solution. This is not how movies are typically set up. Here, for instance, the first act essentially starts with Jesse arriving at Todd’s house. In a normal movie, we would know why he’s there and what he needs. We don’t have that information in El Camino. We follow Jesse simply because we’re already watching the movie. Over the course of the second act, Gilligan explains what Jesse is doing and the stakes and significance of why. All of that is to say, I think it works. Breaking Bad is my favorite TV show of all time. This movie is on par with its good episodes, though maybe not its great ones. Gilligan remains the best filmmaker at presenting an unsolvable problem and having his character figure their way out of it. The way the fridge and the shootout unfold are both masterfully done. I did enjoy the cameos and flashbacks. Often, I felt like they provided a deeper level of reason and pathos for the events of the movie. Some of them were certainly more “fan-service-y” than anything else. But hey, I’m a fan. This film was extremely well done and continued my favorite show of all time. To knock it for not being masterful feels unfair.
Grade: B / B+ El Camino- Vince Gilligan (2019)
13th: Mean Streets – Martin Scorsese (1973)
Watched at home. I had previously seen Mean Streets in an undergrad film class. It was fun to revisit it after dedicating so much of my free time since then to studying film. It’s really, really exciting to watch. Goodfellas is a better version of this movie in almost every way. But there is something about Mean Streets that makes me want to like it more. It’s certainly more emotionally based. A lot of the logic of the film is really deeply buried. Scorsese doesn’t translate this world for us as much as present it. The film has a narrative and makes sense. We still understand that Uncle Giovanni is the Mafia boss, Michael is a loan shark, Johnny Boy is a fuck-up, and Charlie is trying to navigate these worlds. But it’s really refreshing to watch it and realize these things are shown and not explained. We don’t get a sense of what happens at the pool hall. What is important to know is the volatile nature of all the people involved. It’s violent, exciting, and funny. A perfect Scorsese moment. De Niro is obviously incredible in this movie but I was blown away by Keitel. He’s able to navigate through all these worlds so seamlessly. You understand both his love for this sinful life and the guilt he feels for enjoying it. I am really interested in some of the homoerotic tones within the film. There’s a series of quick cuts in which Charlie and Johnny Boy share a bed. I think narratively, they do so just as close Italian “brothers.” But, you get these scenes interspersed with Charlie fantasizing about Teresa and then having sex with her. At the end of the film, Johnny Boy hurls anger at Charlie for being above him, for having a higher uncle who can pull him out of the low life. It feels like being gay or repressing those urges, could stand-in for any of this. That’s the beauty of Mean Streets. It’s so emotive and open to interpretation. Even if it’s not the best Scorsese film, its the one you could probably sink into the deepest.
Grade: A Mean Streets – Martin Scorsese (1973)
14th: A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night – Ana Lily Amirpour (2014)
Watched at home with Gioia. It is extraordinarily well done. Especially how everything is set up. Halfway through, I told Gioia I thought it was one of the best films I had seen in a while. I loved how starkly everything in the movie was set up. There’s Anash who begins by telling the audience that he worked 2,100 some odd days to buy his car. Later, while at his employer’s house, he tells her it’s inappropriate for them to be in the same room together. He is almost comically pious and chaste. A true moral beacon. Then we meet Anash’s father, a heroin addict who owes money everywhere. He can’t even react as Saeed, a cartoonishly evil pimp demands his money. As payment, Saeed takes Anash’s car. When the girl appears and kills Saeed we get the foundation for the tension of the film. She watches the night and kills the immoral. We worry for Anash as he stumbles into Saeed’s money and drugs. It’s his first trip into bad behavior. Will she punish him? It makes it that much more compelling that he approaches her in an ecstasy-drunken stupor. You fear what he might do. You fear what she has done. It’s riddled with tension. All the while, you have aspects in the background that speak to these themes. The scenery of “Bad City” are oil drills. Literal mechanics of evil that suck life from the earth. The costume design works incredibly well too. The Girl’s chador is her vampire costume. It plays on these notions of morality. It asks what would happen if roles were reversed. If women were the ones who terrorized men at night. At least this Girl has a moral code. I think the ending of the film is less successful than the setup. It’s usually how horror movies go. The film tries to humanize aspects of Anash and the Girl. Their interest in sad music. I just don’t think this middle ground is as interesting as the stark contrast of the setup.
Grade: B+ A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night – Ana Lily Amirpour (2014)
17th: My Neighbor Totoro – Hayao Miyazaki (1988)
Watched at home with Gioia. I may have saved the best for last! Totoro is so heartfelt and wonderful. It really feels like a blueprint for all the best parts of Miyazaki’s later films. It also plays into the style of his films I like the best. The world here is mostly normal, and the trials the characters face are completely natural. The magical flourishes make this world dynamic but don’t really uproot anything. One can make a pretty compelling argument that there is no “real” magic in the film. Our introduction to it is the soot sprites which is really just a magical version of dust. Then, over the course of the film, the other creatures only appear to the children and only at trying times in their lives. This tension is wholly intentional. Miyazaki is trying to make a point about the beauty and wonder of life, childhood, imagination, and how these things can be used to overcome the worst aspects of life. Aside from the premise and magic, I love all the characters on the margins. One of my main takeaways from Miyazaki is how he utilizes secondary characters in his films. The father, here, for instance, is so full of life. I feel in a typical movie they would have the father be run-down and busy because of his job, the kids, and his sick wife. Miyazaki doesn’t show us this. Instead, he has the father be really present, energetic, and full of life. He’s weird and funny. We see that he is working at night and that he comes home late from work. We can assume that all these things are weighing on him. But he never shows it to his kids, which makes him even more sympathetic and likable. Similarly, the neighbor boy is so weird, shy, and funny. In any other film, he would just be a stock character. In this one, I’m genuinely curious about his life and his perspective on the girls. The most impressive part of Totoro to me is the tone. Throughout the whole movie, I was simultaneously choked up and laughing. I think it does the best job of conveying the complexities of life. That it can be both beautiful and tinged with sadness. A theme and a tone that’s prevalent in most of Miyazaki’s movies.
Grade: A My Neighbor Totoro – Hayao Miyazaki (1988)
20th: Parasite – Bong Joon-Ho (2019)
Watched at the Arclight with Gioia, Adam, and Alice. I need some more time to think about it, but this may be a “masterpiece.” At the very least, it’s great. The film starts as a perfect version of one kind of movie. We meet an impoverished family. They live in a “semi-basement.” They navigate every corner of their small home in search of a free wifi signal. We see the street being fumigated. Whether it’s a private or municipal service the statement is clear. They have no thought about the fact that people live here. To them, these aren’t even people. What’s more, the family plays into this. They leave their windows open for a “free” extermination. To an alarming extent, they’ve already subjugated themselves below human rights. An interesting commentary the film makes is the intersection of human rights and technology. Internet access is a UN human right. So while the family’s lack of wifi is maybe not as pressing as being fumigated, each is an establishment of their sub-human treatment. As we meet this family we also gain key insights into their individual world views. Ki-woo is a hustler, but is also modest. It takes a huge push for him to take over Min’s tutoring job even if it is something that Ki-woo and his family desperately need. He doesn’t believe he can fake the college credentials that he doesn’t have. He thinks there is something distinctly lower-class about himself. At the end, he vows not to portray a rich person but to actually become one. His sister, Ki-jeong, on the other hand, is a natural. She not only infiltrates this family but takes it a step farther. Instead of being a mere art teacher she becomes an “art therapist.” One who conveniently charges at a higher rate. She is the most comfortable slipping into this upper-class world. Her family even comments on it. She bosses around the other characters she’s commanding, she lavishes in the bathtub watching television. The father is so thankful for everything the family does have. He’s unrelentingly optimistic. He also embodies the lower class the most out of any of these characters. When his wife makes a joke about it, he flashes into a violent temper. One that for the first half of the film is played off to be fake. In the second half, it is tragically real. The mother is the glue that keeps them all together. We also see that she is ruthless. In multiple instances she violently attacks the former housekeeper. She makes these efforts to protect her family, but does so with little hesitation. She understands the world they live in. So for the first half of the film, the family works this ruse. As they celebrate a weekend off in the house, the audience waits for the real family to return. It’s here that we learn the former housekeeper has been hiding her husband in a secret basement. The movie completely turns. We realize that not only does this family have to survive scrutiny from the upper class, but they also have to fend off each other. At the beginning of the film, the family convinces a pizza company to fire one of its employees to hire them. Here, it’s the same thing but with more dire circumstances. The movie unwinds with every bit of development and foreshadowing paid off. Ki-woo’s worst fears come true. He realizes that he and his family can’t masquerade as the upper class. He stares out onto the party and realizes how effortless it is for everyone else. Ki-jeong’s arrogance gets the best of her. She’s the one that has successfully shadowed this family and she is attacked and killed along with them. And the father’s violent temper explodes. He can’t control the contempt he feels for being lower class. He lashes out and kills his employer. It’s absolutely incredible storytelling. It’s laden with themes of class, division, and ethics. The film moves from satire to horror effortlessly. It’s really a staggering movie. It’s the most anxiety-riddled viewing experience I can remember. Yeah, I think this is a masterpiece.
Grade: A Parasite – Bong Joon-Ho (2019)
21st: Carrie – Brian De Palma (1976)
Watched at home with Gioia. It was not what I was expecting! I mean, I knew the bucket of pig’s blood was coming but I didn’t realize how sexually charged the film is. I’d be really curious to read some pieces on what De Palma is doing with this sexuality and whether it exists in the Stephen King novel. The movie is pretty extraordinarily well-made. There are so many shots that have been totally ripped off or re-used in other films. I’m thinking of the shot overlooking the prom, the pig’s blood scene, and the way Carrie and her mother are staged. A lot of Stephen King’s horror doesn’t work especially well in film because it’s so supernaturally charged. I think it’s the reason that Pet Semetary or It struggles to always frame and capture the horror in those novel. It really works here for a couple of reasons. The pacing is excellent. De Palma holds off as long as possible before having the attack on Carrie and her turn. There’s so much tension, hope, and sadness as we watch her at prom. Likewise, I think the high school aspect is a great angle. As I already mentioned, De Palma is leaning heavily into sexually charged themes. The over the top, exploitative nature fits really well into a high school setting. When Carrie does fully attack it’s enormous. I think in so many other movies it would look terrible. But it’s totally justified and terrifying here. It feels like her rage and sorrow can’t be contained. If I had to hold anything against Carrie, I think the last 10ish minutes are slow. The lead up to prom is so tense, it’s hard to recapture that energy once we have the turn. Still, this is a classic and certainly one of the best King adaptations.
Grade: B+ / A- Carrie – Brian De Palma (1976)
25: Black Swan – Darren Aronofsky (2010)
Watched at home. I’m not quite sure where I land on this one. Let’s figure it out. Here’s some things I liked. I thought it was pretty terrifying. It does psychological horror really well. I think some of the scariest parts are moments that aren’t conventionally that scary. The prime example being when Nina is masturbating and her mom is in the room. The whole dynamic between Nina and her mom is unsettling. The way Nina has to race into her room at points is really tense. I think some of the viscera was exceptionally done. The scratching and especially the picking of her fingers is frightening. It’s truly disgusting. The concentration on the physical toll of dancing was really interesting. It’s compounded by the mental component for sure. But something like Nina’s anorexia straddles the line. It’s a physical manifestation of a psychological problem. What didn’t I like about this movie? I do think the sex scene and infatuation between Nina and Lily was a little undeserved. It felt more like an excuse to have a sex scene in the movie. Moreover, one of my least favorite movie tropes is when what is presented to us is not actually reality. I think Black Swan does this about as well as any movie I’ve seen. Still, it’s not my favorite device. The ending is the main thing that doesn’t really work for me. On the one hand, the movie is extremely black and white (or black and pink shall we say). It’s literally about as starkly laid out as can be. Can Nina change in accordance to what the world is demanding of her? Aside from these sharp contrasts, I think most of the film actually lives in a grey zone. I think if there is an ethos to the movie, it’s that the toll of art and whether or not these sacrifices are worthwhile is complicated. I think then to have Nina kill herself is tough. I really don’t know. The more I write this out, the less I’m convinced of my argument. Maybe the whole movie does live in stark contrast? There’s certainly nothing subtle about Aronofsky’s filmmaking. In that case, I think the ending probably hammers home Aronofsky’s message. In which case…I don’t know. This movie looks great, has great performances, is scary and disturbing. I think it’s about as much as you can ask for from a horror movie.
Grade: B / B+ Black Swan – Darren Aronofsky (2010)
25: The Lost Boys – Joel Schumacher (1987)
Watched at home, the second half with Gioia. It’s a fun movie. I can see why it’s a favorite. I think the design is really cool. I like the idea of a “Santa Carla.” I love how quickly the movie gets in and out. It truly feels like an 80s movie in that way. In the contemporary version of this we would spend ten more minutes with David and the vampires, ten more minutes with Star and that little half-vampire boy, ten more minutes with the Frog brothers, and ten more minutes with the mom and Max. In other words, I think because there is such a strong supernatural / fantasy element, a current film would feel compelled to explore it to death. I’m glad Schumacher doesn’t do this. I think he realizes that the fun of this world is in the unknown. It reminds me of how something like Raiders of the Lost Arc or even Star Wars are like 2 hours. Less is more. I do think this movie is exceptionally silly. The unintentional comedy award goes to David and his minions for saying “Michael” about 200 times in the movie. That’s about all I’ve got. I liked it, I thought it was funny, and I fell asleep during it. Don’t tell anyone.
Grade: B- The Lost Boys – Joel Schumacher (1987)
31st: The Invitation – Karyn Kusama (2015)
Watched at home with Gioia. I was really skeptical of this movie for the first hour. The dinner party is so awkward and staged. Not even in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable. More in the way of, I wonder if this director has ever had a dinner party and/or friends. It’s just hard to believe why any of the characters are here or why / how they interact with each other. I think the big conceit you have to make is that this isn’t a normal dinner party. That it’s awkward because all of these people haven’t seen each other, it’s a reunion between ex-husband and wife, and it’s all taking place at the house where their kid accidentally died. Does that get you to believe that everybody wouldn’t peace out when a character admits he beat his wife to death? Does it get you to believe the other characters would all single out Will for being too skeptical amidst all this free wine? I doubt it. What’s weird is that the movie works in the opposite way of most horror movies. While I didn’t really buy the first hour, I thought the third act was great. For whatever reason, I didn’t suspect that what was afoot was a mass suicide. I just thought it’d be a creepy murder thing. It makes so much sense and is right in front of us the whole time. We also see that Eden is really, really doped up. That also makes sense. I loved the reveal that this is happening everywhere. I don’t know? I’m pretty impressed. It’s a good script. One where you have to suspend your disbelief, but one that works nonetheless.
Grade: B / B+ The Invitation – Karyn Kusama (2015)
Last night I watched My NeighborTotoro, culminating a two month period in which I watched all of Hayao Miyazaki’s films for the very first time. Of course, this comes on the same day that HBO announced all of Studio Ghibli’s films will come to their streaming platform. In short, I bought a DVD player for nothing. These films are so exceedingly delightful though, I don’t really even mind having spent the time and money to track them all down. I tried to rank how these films fit in Miyazaki’s career. But really it was just a chance for me to relive them and ramble about how good they are. So without further adieu, number 11 is….
11. Castle in the Sky (1986) The first official Studio Ghibli film! It’s actually pretty wild how many central elements of Miyazaki’s work are already here. It’s obsessed with flying. The central message of the film is about the environment and conservation. There’s a castle! It’s pretty good. It’s likely the best worst film of any director I admire. Miyazaki truly does not have any complete misses. So what doesn’t work? For one, I’m fairly sure the DVD I rented from the library skipped the first scene. More than anything, this film suffers in that it contains so many elements of Miyazaki’s later work. They are all aspects he would streamline and improve in the future. Here, they’re are a bit dulled by the story. A story which, like a lot of great filmmakers’ early work, is just trying to do too much.
10. The Castle of Cagliostro (1979) Ooof. I can hear the several readers of this post already saying “What does he have against castles?” Nothing! I promise. This is Miyazaki’s first feature film. The reason it’s ahead of Castle in the Sky is that the story is more streamlined. It’s based on a manga and television series that Miyazaki worked on. I think that’s why it feels more fully realized than Castle in the Sky. Unfortunately, it is not a Ghibli film. Which is noticeable. The film feels much less magical than Miyazaki’s later work.
9. Ponyo (2008) I sense this will be contentious. I like Ponyo! I like all of these films. This is undoubtedly the cutest Miyazaki film. It is so delightful. The animation is truly outstanding. There is so much happening in every shot. I may be talking myself out of this low ranking. My beef (or ham) with Ponyo is that there’s not a whole lot of story here. It’s incredibly simple in design. Something that I usually like in most films. But it really is bare bones here. There’s a part in which Ponyo and Sōsuke take a boat to find Sōsuke’s mom. I realized then that the two characters wouldn’t have anything to say to each other. Which they don’t! The film kind of just cuts around it. The animation and the cuteness of the characters make Ponyo more than worthwhile. Compared to Miyazaki’s other work, it’s just not my favorite.
8. The Wind Rises (2013) The Wind Rises is the most unique movie on this list. It feels like the least Miyazki-ish of any of his films. The film is about the scope of an entire life, not just childhood. There aren’t any distinctly magical elements to the story (to be fair there are some magical dreams). Yet this is the movie that’s supposed to be the most autobiographical. It’s about an artist Miyazaki greatly admires. It’s about a life devoted to perfection in art. I can’t lie. I really like it. These types of stories make sense to me. It’s like Boyhood but about an aircraft engineer. I probably like it more than the next two movies on the list, but I can’t argue that it’s better than them. While the movie works, I kind of think it would be better if it weren’t animated. For that reason, it’s hard to rank it any higher on a list celebrating a master of animated film.
7. Nausicäa of the Valley of The Wind (1984) The first unofficial Ghibli film (It was made with essentially the same people but before the studio’s founding). As we are about to get into, Miyazaki’s fantasy stories interest me much less than the magical realism ones. Objectively I don’t think there’s really anything to hold against this film. Especially for how early it’s made. I think the knock on it would be that it feels like an early version of Princess Mononoke. You can make arguments for either film. The advantages for Nausicäa are its unpolished energy and synthy score.
6. Princess Mononoke (2000) You could make an argument that this is a masterpiece. It’s undoubtedly the biggest and most ambitious Miyazaki film. It really has the scope of something like Lord of the Rings. It’s arguably even more auspicious. It’s a film totally devoted to environmental conservatism that uses magic and fantasy elements to convey its message. So maybe more like Avatar, but good? It also has the distinction of being one of the few films over 2 hours that I didn’t think was too long. This film has so many storylines, turns, and complications and I still think they all work. It’s really, really impressive. It’s not my favorite for the simple reason that it’s not exceptionally fun. Given what the movie is trying to do, that’s probably a credit to it.
5. Howl’s Moving Castle (2004) Howl’s Moving Castle is the first Miyazaki film I ever watched. It’s so much fun. It’s light and weird and so funny. Miyazaki makes a lot of subtle decisions in this movie that I absolutely love. The first is when Sophie is transformed into an old woman. He doesn’t have her lament this curse or force a heartfelt moment where the audience realizes how terrible it is. Instead, he just has her journey out to the Waste to try to fix it. One of the best parts of Miyazaki’s films is how much credit he gives to his audience. For as poignant as so many of his movies are, he never really tries to manipulate the viewer. We know that Sophie needs to have the curse removed so the movie doesn’t bother to explain that. It’s intuitive. It makes Sophie funny, tough, and resourceful as a character. It’s such an unusual and smart move. A move by which Miyazaki can keep the movie’s whimsical energy. My favorite parts of Howl’s Moving Castle are its eccentricities. Calcifer and Turnip Head are incredible characters. The reason this film isn’t higher is that I’m not convinced the plot makes any sense. About halfway through things get pretty convoluted. I honestly don’t think I could explain the plot even if I watched it again. I also don’t think that really matters. The movie is too much fun for me to care.
4. Porco Rosso (1992) The genius of Porco Rosso is that it’s a pretty normal movie with the major exception that the protagonist is a pig-man. I love that it doesn’t really factor into the movie save for Porco’s own self-worth. Another hallmark of Miyazaki’s best films is how understated they are. This film leaves so many things unsaid. We learn that Porco was at one point cursed into a pig. It’s not really said how, or why, or what he can do to change back. And only at a couple of brief moments does he dwell on it. Otherwise, he just cracks jokes about his transformation. Likewise, we get a backstory with Porco and Gina. But the film intentionally doesn’t resolve that storyline. It’s left for the viewers to decide. I love that Miyazaki frames this story through what feels like a Humphrey Bogart character. There’s so much enthusiasm and charm here. At the beginning, when pirates kidnap the school children, Miyazaki chooses for them to be oblivious to the situation. Instead of being scared, the girls are ecstatic to be amongst the pirates. It’s delightful. It’s a showcase for Miyazaki’s talent in making scenes unexpected and joyful. It elevates the whole movie.
3. My Neighbor Totoro (1988) Totoro is so beautifully heartfelt. It really feels like a blueprint for all the best parts of Miyazaki’s films. Totoro also plays into the style of his films I like best. The world is mostly normal here, and the trials the characters face are completely natural. The magical flourishes make this world dynamic but don’t really uproot anything. One can make a pretty compelling argument that there is no “real” magic in the film. Our introduction to it is the Soot Sprites which are really just a magical version of dust. Then, over the course of the film, the other creatures appear only to the children and only at trying times in their lives. This tension is wholly intentional. Miyazaki is trying to make a point about beauty, nature, children, imagination and how these things can overcome the worst circumstances of life. I love all the characters on the margins. One of my main takeaways from Miyazaki is how he utilizes secondary characters in his films. The father, for instance, is so full of life. In a typical movie, they would have him be run-down and busy because of his job, the kids, and his sick wife. Miyazaki doesn’t give us this character. Instead, he has the father be present, energetic, and full of life. He’s funny and really pretty strange. We see that he is working at night and that he comes home late from the university. We can assume that all these things are weighing on him. But he never shows it to his kids, which in turn makes him even more sympathetic and likable. Similarly, the neighbor boy is so awkward and shy. In any other film, he would just be a stock character. In this one, I’m genuinely curious about his life and his perspective on the girls. The most impressive part of Totoro is its tone. Throughout the whole movie, I was simultaneously choked up and laughing. I think it does the best job of conveying the bittersweetness of life. That it, like this film, can be both beautiful and tinged with sadness.
2. Spirited Away (2001) The New York Times ranked Spirited Away as the 2nd best film of the 21st Century. So how can I only have it at number 2 here? Well, my first choice is technically from the 20th Century. The real answer is that there’s not any type of case I can make against this movie. It’s a masterpiece. What is most remarkable to me is how understated the movie is. Of course, there are spirits, talking animals, witches, and so much magic. But all of these just serve to move you through the story. They aren’t disruptive. The movie isn’t even about these things. What the movie is actually about is Chihiro’s personal transformation. It’s about the sadness and anxiety of leaving adolescence behind. It very well may be the best film on what it feels like to grow up. This theme is the whole emotional force of the film and it is seamlessly interwoven into the story. It is incredibly sophisticated filmmaking. There are two moments that I think perfectly capture the magic of this movie. The first is the very, very, very famous shot of Chihiro and No-Face riding on the train. What I think is so powerful about this shot is that I’ve seen it a million times and only recently realized that in part of the shot we are looking through another passenger. Like physically through their body. That may be more on me for not noticing it. Still, this is the depth and complexity that exists in these films. The second moment is at the very end when Chihiro has finally earned the friendship and respect of the spa and has come into her own. She has to leave the spa to go back to her parents. Finally, there will be the moment where Chihiro reflects and laments how life always pushes forward and leaves everything behind. But then there’s a literal rule that Chihiro can’t look back at the spa or the magic won’t work. It’s so brilliant and true to life. More importantly, it’s so much more heartfelt than in every other movie in which there’d be an engineered moment where she does look back.
1. Kiki’s Delivery Service (1989) Every aspect of this film is so, so wonderful. I wish I could live inside it. Kiki is such a funny, lovable character. Kirsten Dunst’s vocal performance is maybe my favorite thing in any Miyazaki film. She speaks so fast. It’s as if all her words were jammed together. Kiki so often can’t control the speed or volume of her voice. She sounds exactly like a 13-year-old girl. For a movie about an adolescent witch, this film is so grounded in the human experience. It’s remarkable at how in-tune Miyazaki seems to be with adolescence. I love that this film centers all of its conflicts internally. There’s not a scene in which Kiki gets in trouble for messing up, or is scolded for being too loud, etc. Instead, everyone loves Kiki. The baker is delighted every time Kiki is excitedly shouting. Kiki’s customers all love her. The tension is whether or not Kiki can figure out what’s happening inside her. It’s about how she can balance the burden of responsibility with her own personhood. One of the things I was most surprised by with this film is how slowly some of the scenes move. It’s kind of incredible. There are just scenes when Kiki is puttering around or making breakfast. They don’t have to be in the film for the plot. But they make the story so much more effective. It really humanizes her. It feels like watching the totality of her life, even the boring, minor details. I don’t know if I can really make a case that Kiki is the best Miyazaki film. I think Spirited Away is doing things that are far more complicated. It’s definitely the more polished of the two. But this film is the one that hits me at my core. It’s the reason why Miyazaki’s films have such an impressive legacy. They’re so deeply connective even if you can’t relate to the details. Kiki is the one that feels most true to me even if I’ve never been a 13-year-old witch who can talk with her cat. That’s why it’s number 1.
2nd: Kiki’s Delivery Service – Hayao Miyazaki (1989)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s my favorite Miyazaki film so far. I don’t know if it’s the best. I think Spirited Away is doing things that are a bit more complicated. Every aspect of this film is so wonderful. Kiki is such a funny, lovable character. I thought Kirsten Dunst’s vocal performance was incredible. Kiki so often can’t control the speed or volume of her voice. She sounds exactly like a 13-year-old girl. I love how these movies tackle universal themes through fantastical stories. This movie knows exactly what growing up feels like but shows it through the story of an adolescent witch. I also love how these movies have all their conflicts rooted internally. There’s not a scene in which Kiki gets in trouble for messing up, or is scolded for being too loud, etc. Instead, everyone loves Kiki. The baker is delighted every time Kiki is excitedly shouting. Kiki’s customers all love her. The tension is whether or not Kiki can figure out what’s happening inside her. It’s about how she can balance the burden of responsibility with her own personhood. One of the things I was most surprised by with this film is how slowly some of the scenes move. It’s kind of incredible. There are just scenes when Kiki is puttering around or making breakfast. They don’t have to be in the film for the plot. But I think they make the story so much more effective. It really humanizes Kiki. It feels like watching the totality of her life down to the boring, minor details. These details are in other films too. I was just surprised they were in this animated “kids” movie. It’s undoubtedly part of why this movie stands out.
Grade: A Kiki’s Delivery Service – Hayao Miyazaki (1989)
5th: The 39 Steps – Alfred Hitchcock (1935)
Watched at home. It’s impressive. A super fun and tightly wound thriller. I was shocked by how early it was made. I don’t know if I’ve seen a movie this exciting from the 30s. I really liked the overall plot. As the movie rolled along it teetered on the point of being too outlandish. I started to fear that the mystery was not solidly fleshed out. It seemed there wasn’t any solid story, just plot to keep Hannay moving. All these fears, were of course, foolish. The plot is a web, and the story is intricately revealed to us. We aren’t privy to the information because it’s a mystery. Hitchcock keeps the audience in suspense. It was incredibly exciting to see everything come together at the end. I feel silly for doubting that it would. The 39 Steps – Alfred Hitchcock (1935)
7th: It Chapter Two – Andy Muschietti (2019)
Watched at the Logan with Gioia. This movie, I think, is a matter of expectations. I went into it expecting it to be overlong and bad. It is certainly too long, but a decent movie. I thought at parts, it was almost a surrealistic horror film. There were times where I struggled with that. I would become lost in thought for a minute and then realize I had no idea where we were or how we got there. For the most part, I thought giving up traditional logic was a smart move. Even in the books, I don’t think Pennywise holds up to logic. The resolution of defeating him with insults was stupid, but I’m not sure any other explanation would have really worked either. The Loser’s Club aspect is what worked best in the film for me. I thought those scenes worked well around the film and helped ground the horror of Pennywise and Derry. I’m pretty surprised at the negative reaction to the film. I didn’t think it was tremendously different than the first installment. It was most definitely better than Scary Storiesto Tell in the Dark.
Grade: C+ / B- It Chapter 2 – Andy Muschietti (2019)
9th: Spiderman: Into the Spider-Verse –Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, and Rodney Rothman (2018)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s easily my favorite superhero film. I would be remised to not first mention the overall design and illustration of the film. It’s incredibly innovative and so engaging. The characters and the city feel real and lived in. On top of that, the film incorporates elements of comic strips and effects seamlessly into its story. Especially in action scenes. It makes the whole feel of the movie so dynamic. It really was delightful to watch which is something I never say about animated movies. Aside from the animation, the story is the obvious highlight. I loved how they acknowledge how tiresome it is to keep hearing the origin story over and over again. And even though they make that joke, they still mirror Miles’s journey in the same way. He’s still an awkward teenager who’s bitten by a spider and loses his uncle. If you look at the overall scope and plot of the movie, it’s a pretty typical spiderman story. What is so different about this one, is that the filmmakers choose to make small tweaks and changes where they can. I don’t want to undersell how ambitious and impressive this film is. It is both of those things. But I do think this movie’s success is from making dozens of small improvements. For instance, the soundtrack is updated. Miles’ engagement and awkward singing is updated. Miles is awkward like the Peter Parkers before him, but he’s charming. He struggles because being a teenager is hard. On top of that, it’s important to note that Miles is Latino and Black. His dad is a cop. They’re all tiny tweaks that make Miles and the story so much more engaging. The film acknowledges these changes as well. We literally have a gang of alternate spider…heroes. We see how the perception of these heroes changes over place and time. I am truly so impressed with this movie. It could be my favorite film from last year.
Grade: A Spiderman – Into the Spiderverse – – Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman (2018)
10th: Personal Shopper – Olivier Assayas (2016)
Watched at home with Gioia. I was in and out throughout the movie. I think I ultimately landed on out. Still, the film is really provocative and obviously elicited a reaction from me. I definitely resonated more with the second act in which Maureen is being texted. The film sets up the possibility that it could be Lewis or Kyra’s lover. The tension in this part of the film works so well because of it. We’ve seen a spirit. We’ve learned different modes of communications that spirits have. Kyra is waiting for a sign from Lewis. On the other hand, she’s obviously unwell. She has a strange and abrupt conversation with Kyra’s lover. A situation in which he immediately offers for her to work for him. I thought everything in this part (and to be fair the majority) of the movie worked really well. It was tense, engaging, scary. I was particularly drawn to the camera. It’s not a feature I typically notice. Here, however, it felt especially voyeuristic. I loved how it would stay behind walls as Maureen moved between rooms. I loved when she is trying clothes on that it scans up and down her body. It was in lockstep with the tone and story of the movie. I have always loved Kristen Stewart. I think she is an incredible actor. It can’t be understated that she literally carries this whole movie. Most of the film is her just looking at and responding to the phone. Moreover, the rest of the scenes are her trying on clothes. It takes a special talent to be able to make this work. I was really in awe of the performance. As much as I thought the ending wasn’t worthwhile, I don’t know if I really have a bone to pick. It does seem like a logical outcome. I just felt a bit underwhelmed after the mystery of the texting was resolved. But as much as this movie and its ending may be flawed, I’m obviously responding pretty strongly to it. Go figure.
Grade: B- / B Personal Shopper – Olivier Assayas (2016)
14th: Porco Rosso – Hayao Miyazaki (1992)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s wonderful. I am so impressed with how understated Miyazaki’s films are. This film leaves so many things unsaid. We learn that Porco was at one point cursed into a pig. It’s not really said how, or why, or what he can do to change back. And only at a couple of brief moments does he dwell on it. Otherwise, he just cracks jokes about his transformation. Likewise, we get a backstory with Porco and Gina. But the film intentionally doesn’t resolve that storyline. It’s left for the viewers to decide. Something that’s pretty incredible for a kid’s film. I also just love the tone of the film. Miyazaki chooses to tell this story through the framing of a 40s melodramatic movie. It’s a Humphrey Bogart style film about a flying pig. Similarly, I loved the enthusiasm and joy that’s put into the movie. At the beginning, when pirates kidnap the school children, Miyazaki chooses for them to be oblivious to the situation. The schoolgirls are delighted to be amongst the pirates. It’s delightful and hilarious. We already know the stakes of the situation. It’s Porco vs. the pirates. Miyazaki doesn’t have to heighten the tension. Instead, he makes it a comedic moment with the schoolgirls climbing all over the plane. It shows the power in making scenes, and consequently the whole film, unexpected and joyful. It elevates the whole movie.
Grade: A- Porco Rosso – Hayao Miyazaki (1992)
15th: Network – Sidney Lumet (1976)
Watched in three parts with Gioia. It was not the ideal situation, but while the film is funny and ridiculous, it’s also fairly heady. The construction of a movie like this is daunting. Everything is layered and folds back in on itself. The movie opens with Howard saying he’ll kill himself on air for the ratings. The movie ends in the network assassinating him because of the ratings. We not only have this story, but so many others, that weave in and out, and create the movie. We have Howard’s arc as a mad prophet, Diana’s rise as a ruthless television executive, the CAA’s acquisition of UBS, Max’s friendship with Howard, Max’s affair with Diana, and the creation of a program chronicling socially-minded, terrorist groups. The film is hilarious, terrifying, and incredibly prescient. It essentially details the commodification of human eyes. Something that obviously had to exist in 1976. The ruthlessness that is satirical in the movie, feels very real in 2019. This film also feels anticipatory of “peak tv.” It confidently weaves various storylines and arcs. It trusts the viewers to follow and piece them together. So many parts of this film feel akin to something like Mad Men or an extremely cynical version of The West Wing. I was impressed with how Lumet shot the movie. In line with the satirical nature, the film is shot hyper-dramatically. Various characters masquerade as God. I’d love to rewatch this having pieced together the whole film. I think subsequent viewings would not only be rewarding but more entertaining. If I had anything to complain about, I’d say the tone and headiness is a lot to take in the first time.
Grade: B+ / A- Network – Sidney Lumet (1976)
16th: Rebecca – Alfred Hitchcock (1940)
Watched at home with Gioia. My mom called me about 40 minutes into the film. When I told her what I was watching, she naturally asked if it was suspenseful. To that point, it hadn’t been. It had seemed like a straightforward British, generational, romance story. One that was well done, but pretty typical. After that point, obviously, the film turned. The middle third of this movie was by far my favorite. It turns into a psychological horror film in which the new Mrs. de Winter (we don’t even get a first name) tries to replace Rebecca at Manderley. At first, it’s just plainly stressful. She doesn’t know the duties of a lady. She struggles to familiarize herself with the house. The staff is clearly still attached to Rebecca. But Hitchcock slowly dials up the horror. Things get scarier and scarier. It seems as if the whole estate is trying to force her out. It’s pure psychological horror. Something that could be a forbearer to The Shining. Moreover, everything is brilliantly kept under the shadow of Rebecca. It’s not until the twist, in which we learn that Mr. deWinter didn’t love Rebecca but hated her, that the film lets up. The final third is surprising and done generally well, but grows a bit tedious. It made sense for all of the loose plot threads. Rebecca’s cousin has to return. As does the odd boathouse worker, Ben. We need a resolution to the mystery. And it is totally impressive that the film informs us Mr. de Winter murdered Rebecca and still manages to redeem him. But these threads felt the most borne out of a novel. I think the film may have worked better if it stayed rooted in the horror of Manderley, as opposed to resolving every aspect of the story. One last thing to mention. The performances are incredible. Joan Crawford and Judith Anderson, in particular, are mesmerizing. Their dynamic feels rooted in deep psychological hurt and fear. That’s not even to mention Laurence Olivier who gives a completely restrained, and understated performance. It’s one that feels weird until you realize who his character is. When you do, you see how incredible the portrayal truly is.
Grade: A- Rebecca – Alfred Hitchcock (1940)
17th: Perfect Blue – Satoshi Kon (1997)
Watched at home with Gioia. I believe it’s my first real experience with anime. There are things that I think work really well. I like the theme and portrayal of paranoia a lot. I especially like the scope of the film. The opening shots of various crowd members talking about Mimi is really smart. It establishes the tension of the film from the start. Likewise, I thought there were a lot of really cool cuts in the film. It’s kind of a played-out device, but I liked that they would cut in and out of reality with the television show Mima is working on. It certainly adds to the confusion. You feel a bit of what Mima is going through mentally. Sadly, there are some things that I think don’t work at all. First and foremost, this movie is pornographic. I don’t think you need so much nudity or sexual violence in it. I didn’t think these scenes were done in any respectful manner. Part of it could be that I’ve never watched cartoon nudity before. Maybe I was just uncomfortable? But I think most of it comes from the fact that Mima is running around with her shirt unbuttoned for the final 20 minutes. It’s gross. Less troublesome, but still annoying, is the dream sequences. At least here it serves a purpose. Still, I think you can get away with one or two dream sequences. Once you’re over five of them, it’s tough. I think this film has its merits but I can say pretty definitively that it wasn’t for me.
Grade: C Perfect Blue – Satoshi Kon (1997)
19th: Princess Mononoke – Hayao Miyazaki (1997)
Watched at home. So far this is my least favorite of the Studio Ghibli films I’ve seen. It is still pretty good. It is quite beautiful. A lot of the imagery and themes reminded me of The Legend of Zelda. The story is extraordinarily ambitious. Which is definitely an attribute but something that doesn’t work perfectly for me. I’ve been astounded by the restraint and simplicity in the previous Miyazaki films I’ve watched. Those stories don’t have a broad arc. Their conflicts are internal transformations. Princess Mononoke is much more complicated and almost entirely external. It’s a fantasy, war epic that is meant as an allegory for environmentalism. I liked it better than say, Avatar, but still felt a bit overwhelmed and disinterested by the scope of the story. I think regardless of its ambition the film tries to bring together a few too many storylines to work perfectly. There’s Ashitsaka’s exile and curse, his relationship with San, the samurai’s, Irontown, the beasts, demons, and eventually the forest spirit. I will say that the movie felt shorter than its runtime. Still, it was too much for my taste.
Grade: B- Princess Mononoke – Hayao Miyazaki (1997)
22nd: Yi Yi – Edward Yang (2000)
Watched at home. It is already one of my favorite movies. It is so complexly and beautifully told. The story primarily documents the lives of three members of a family. NJ, the patriarch and a partner at a struggling engineering firm, Ting-Ting, his teenage daughter, and Yang-Yang, his 8-year-old son. We watch the family as they deal with change and hardship over the course of the year. The film extends out to other family members too but stays grounded in the perspectives of NJ, Ting-Ting, and Yang-Yang. The film begins at the wedding for NJ’s brother in law. We see Ting-Ting struggle with the marriage as her uncle left his long-time lover after impregnating her assistant, his new bride. We see Yang-Yang get bullied by girls at this wedding. And we see NJ stay muted as he watches all of this chaos. This trait is altogether more pronounced when he runs into a former lover, Sherry, and cannot even speak to her. As the movie progresses the family live their own lives which are informed by, and unwittingly reflect, the lives of their family members. As NJ reconnects with Sherry, he tells that he abruptly left her because she was dictating his life. We now understand why NJ doesn’t condemn his brother-in-law like everyone else. We now understand why NJ leaves Yang-Yang to his own eccentricities, even if it gets him into trouble. Later, NJ and Sherry recount their first date. One that perfectly mirrors the date Sherry is on. It even ends in the same painful and isolated embarrassment. NJ was too bashful to consummate his relationship. Ting-Ting is abandoned by her date as he does the same. Of course, each of these characters is unaware of this connection. They suffer and struggle with the alienation they feel even in such close proximity. Throughout Yi-Yi, the family overhears and catches glimpses of their neighbors’ turbulent life. One that they ignore until it has dire consequences. The only person the family can share their struggles with is a comatose grandmother. A relationship that NJ likens to prayer. It is poignant and heartbreaking. But the film offers some assurance that these muted sufferings are heard. Whether in dream or reality, the grandmother wakes before her death and comforts Ting-Ting. At her funeral, Yang-Yang confides his thoughts aloud, reflecting what each of his family members is feeling. Yi–Yi is a document of life, but one that sticks to emotional truths as opposed to physical ones. The moments reflected in this film are not ordinary. They’re seismic. The film is bookended by a wedding and a funeral. A birth takes place in the middle. Along the way, their grandmother falls into a coma and dies. Ting-Ting’s first boyfriend murders a teacher who had affairs with both members of the neighbor’s family. NJ reconnects with the only woman he ever loved. After explaining why he abandoned her, she does the same to him. A-Di, the troubled brother-in-law marries his lover, is left by her, has a child, fights with his distraught ex, wins and loses his debts, and ends up even. While all these things happen, Yang-Yang is there to document it. Does he capture any of this chaos? No. Instead, he photographs the backs of people’s heads, offering them the one perspective they can’t see. For the family and this film, it is all about the internal turmoil. Yang-Yang is reassuring them that the emotional wreckage they deal with is not as unseen as it feels. If the movie offers anything, it’s that while our turmoil is unique, it is not uncommon. It is the very fabric of life.
Grade: A+
23rd: Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind – Hayao Miyazaki (1984)
Watched at home. It is very similar to Princess Mononoke. I actually liked this earlier and rougher version more. I thought that its storylines, which are still sprawling, came together a bit more naturally. While Mononoke is more ambitious and more polished, I found charm in some of the more stripped-down aspects of this one. I thought some of the limitations in animation actually provided a little charm to the story. Likewise, I thought that there was something refreshing in the synthy score. I liked that it didn’t try to play into any melo- or hyper-dramatic moments. I still think the grand fantasy stories interest me less than Miyazaki’s everyday life ones. I can appreciate the scope and grand themes of Naucisaä… and PrincessMononoke but prefer the simpler human dramas of Kiki… or Porco Rosso.
Grade: B- / B Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind – Hayao Miyazaki (1984)
24th: Days of Heaven – Terrence Malick (1978)
Watched at home. It’s visually stunning. One of the most beautifully shot movies I’ve ever seen. Malick puts such care into the world of this movie. The first third of the film is almost a literal document of the harvest. There’s very little in the way of plot besides hints of things to come. Instead, you feel like you’re watching actual footage of life and work at a farm. More than that actually. It’s so beautiful and tactile you feel like you’re there. Not even just watching it in a film. On top of that, Richard Gere and Brooke Adams are stunning. And it really works for the roles the movie requires of them. Gere is so good looking and well-kept that it feels unnatural. There’s a suspicion that he would be above physical labor for the rest of his life. That he has loftier aspirations. Even his wardrobe fits that theme. He’s always dressed a bit nicer than everyone around him. For Brooke Adams, it’s hard not to trust her. You can’t help falling in love with her. On top of that, Linda Manz’s narration is hypnotic. I would listen to her talk about anything. I loved how everything was subtly designed and set up. The movie is so hypnotic that it works. The narration tells you that there’ll be a salvation for the blessed, and everyone else will burn. Her character picks a locust at the beginning of the film. The film even begins with Richard Gere attacking and maybe killing his foreman. All of these things come to pass and they’re still surprising. A locust infestation ravages the harvest. Sam Shepard, in his rage, burns down everything. Richard Gere inevitably kills him. Due to Malick’s design, these things aren’t obvious, they’re inevitable. It makes the impact of the film all that much more powerful. For a brief moment, you are in paradise. And then it’s taken away.
Grade: A- Days of Heaven – Terrence Malick (1978)
25th: The Wind Rises – Hayao Miyazaki (2013)
Watched at home. It feels quite different from most of his work that I’ve seen. First, there aren’t any magical elements in the story. There are dreams, but they function in the way dreams work in real life. Jiro explores ideas and inspirations but besides that, it’s not directly connected to reality. Moreover, this film is centered on Jiro who isn’t young or a girl: two traits for most of Miyazaki’s protagonists. The film also is different in that it spans a lifetime. All of Miyazaki’s other work spans a couple of days at most. How does it all add up? I think it’s pretty good. I am actually drawn to Miyazaki’s simpler stories so this one works for me. I like how rooted it stays in Jiro’s quest to build airplanes. I like that while there are a few other storylines, they’re all connected to Jiro. I think there are drawbacks too. I was actually surprised that I missed the magic. Not in its transformative powers. But I felt that this movie was missing a little eccentricity or charm. Jiro is an endearing figure, but he’s not an adolescent witch or a Humphrey Bogart-esque pig. The thing I find most surprising is that besides it being Miyazaki, I’m not sure why this was animated. I think everything works just as well if the movie is live-action, and some of the more poignant aspects may work even better. Overall, I really like this direction that Miyazaki takes. I’d be interested in him exploring stories like this. This one is pretty good, it just has a few lulls.
Grade: B The Wind Rises – Hayao Miyazaki (2013)
27th: The Shawshank Redemption – Frank Darabont (1994)
Watched at home with Gioia. Probably the first time I had watched it in ten or so years. It really holds up. I was actually surprised by how brutal so much of the film is. I honestly didn’t really remember that there is rape or such excessive violence. The interlude of Brooks and his eventual suicide is really sad. These parts feel borne out of the Stephen King universe. Just unrelenting brutality. It can be argued, that you need these scenes for the payoff to ultimately work. The first 2/3rds of the movie are trying to crush you. They want you to feel buoyed by the humanity of the film, and then to try to crush it out. Of course, this is all to make the prison escape exhilarating. Which it is. I don’t have too much else to say.
Grade: A- The Shawshank Redemption – Frank Darabont (1994)
30th: The Castle of Cagliostro – Hayao Miyazaki (1979)
Watched at home with Gioia. This was a good pairing with The Wind Rises. The first and (as of now) last features by Miyazaki. There is plenty to admire. It’s a good story. It’s funny and action-packed. It even touches on some themes that become staples in Miyazaki’s later work. There is not, however, much refinement. The movie is silly and really slapstick at parts. All of the characters are the most extreme versions of themselves. It’s not subtle. I think to some extent that works for this movie. Even while Miyazaki is figuring things out, it’s still very fun and entertaining. Still, it doesn’t even approach the nuance and emotional depth he becomes capable of later.
Grade: B- The Castle of Cagliostro – Hayao Miyazaki (1979)
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown – Pedro Almodóvar (1988)
1st: The Suitor – Pierre Etaix (1962)
It’s so funny! I was cackling at parts. My two favorite bits actually happen back to back. It’s when he descends the staircase and the comes back up following the woman to see she has a partner and he turns back around. The next scene is him approaching a woman in a car to reveal that it’s a dog. I should also add I found the background bits and characters so funny. Especially the father.
I really loved following him. I found something so delightful in watching him. The way he moves was just really silly and endearing to me. I thought his face was so peaceful too. Like he’s always lost in a dream.
I noticed that the movie was broken into three bits more or less. The first 30 minutes is the introduction and his attempts to meet women in the city. The second 25 minutes is his encounter with the woman he’s trying to get away from, and the final 30 minutes is his obsession with Stella.
I saw a thematic arc being something like this:
-He’s a bookish, recluse. Seems lost in his own dreams. He’s literally closing himself off from the world with his earplugs.
-He enters the “real world” to find a wife. Has a series of failures. He finds a woman but is repelled by her.
-He sees Stella. Someone who represents the thing he’s seeking but fits into his dream world. He pursues her until she’s no longer part of this fantasy/dream idea.
2nd: Modern Times – Charlie Chaplin (1936) Modern Times started shakily for me. I thought the scale and sheer production of the factory was incredible. The gag of him having a nervous breakdown was funny until he started chasing the woman around because her dress had buttons that matched the bolts. Just an outdated joke. After that, this movie blew me away. I found every gag delightfully funny. More than anything, the storyline carried this one for me. I was kind of shocked at just how much social commentary and anti-capitalism messaging there was. Just beautiful. The Gamin character was also wonderful. I loved how much agency she had in the story. My favorite version of Charlie Chaplin is when he is playing up his boyish side. I was really charmed by how the Gamin kind of led him through the story. I hate to focus on her appearance, but I was pretty blown away by her presence. It was hard for me not to be swept up in their love story. She was so beautiful and charismatic. I just found it to be really touching.
5th: City Lights – Charlie Chaplin (1931)
I definitely liked Modern Times more. It felt tighter and more compact. I thought the gags were more seamlessly woven into the story in Modern Times. Still, there were some real highlights for me in City Lights. I think the whistle at the party is great. It reminded me of The Suitor gag. There are so many stages that build. First, the Tramp mistakes the dessert for the man’s head. Then he takes the whistle. Then swallows it and can’t stop whistling while the musicians attempt to play. When he goes outside, the whistle hails a cab, then stray dogs, and finally, the dogs come in a crash the musicians. I just think I would have stopped at so many stages if I attempted to write a bit like that. I also have to say, I think the boxing match is my favorite Chaplin bit I’ve watched so far. It’s mesmerizing.
6th: Safety Last! – Harold Lloyd (1923)
Lloyd seemed less dynamic as a character than the other silent stars I’ve watched (Tati, Chaplin, Etaix). The description on Criterion describes him as an everyman which I think seems right. I loved the score for this one. It seemed to be more a part of the film than in other ones I’ve watched. I also loved how he kept looping themes and plot lines back in. It struck me as a pretty modern. At the beginning, he’s late for work and adjusts the hands on the clock. By the end, he’s hanging from the hands of a clock tower. Likewise, I think the gag of him mixing up the cops and having his roomie shove the wrong one was extremely silly. But it was cool that he uses it as a device to have the cop chase the roomie away while he attempts to make the climb.
7th: Fry Day (short) – Laura Moss (2017)
Watched at Beronica’s with her and Wills. I really liked it. It’s unique and unsettling. The protagonist especially is captivating. I’d definitely be into checking out anything else Moss does.
7th: Dance, Girl, Dance – Dorothy Arzner (1940)
Watched at Beronica’s with her and Wills! Hopefully the start of a super cool movie club. It was a fun movie. Super melodramatic. Pretty overstated and soapy. It reminded me in some ways of Valley of the Dolls or Mildred Pierce in the scope of what is happening. So much of the movie is over the top. I’m curious as to why this film is considered a masterpiece. Don’t get me wrong, I dug it and had a fun time watching it. But a lot of that was due to its melodrama, not the story. It seems like a big reason for its legacy is that it subverts some masculine framing and ideology. I can for sure see that point in Judy’s speech at the end. However, the portrayal of Bubbles feels out of date. But who knows. Maybe it was progressive to even have a character like her in 1940? Dance Girl Dance – Dorothy Arzner (1940)
9th: Babette’s Feast – Gabriel Axel (1987)
Watched at home with Gioia. Perhaps the most wholesome movie I’ve ever seen. It was so heartfelt and delightful. A type of movie that I’ve really never watched before. It’s definitely a slow burn. But once the plot starts moving, it really is so charming. I wish I had more to say on it. Truthfully, I’m not even sure I can say why I liked it so much. For such a simple premise, there is a kind of mysterious power to it.
Grade: A Babette’s Feast – Gabriel Axel (1987)
9th: Before Midnight – Richard Linklater (2013)
I shudder to think how many entries I’ve already made for this movie. What else to say? It may be my favorite of the series. The first two movies reflect some experiences I’ve had. Falling in love, making a connection. They feel like the fairytales of realism. They highlight the best, most important moments of life. They capture a certain kind of power which is those magical nights that do really happen. Before Midnight may be a more impressive accomplishment. I haven’t had kids or broken marriages. Yet, I understand their arguments. They move in the way real fights do. The characters start with one thing and dance around the issues until they can bring it into the open. You relate to both of them, understand their differences, and yearn for them to keep their connection. This one, again, is steeped in realism but it’s not a fairytale. The ending is incredible. I think I’ll always be moved by it. It’s these two characters stranded and still reaching out to each other. Wouldn’t you know it, I’ve written another long entry about this one. Whoops 🙂
Grade: A
10th: Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark – André Øvredal (2019)
Watched at the Regal City on Western with Wills, Beronica, Beronica’s brother, and Hannah. It’s fun and stupid, but not good. I think the most disappointing thing, is that it seems like it could have been good. I liked the premise of the movie. It was a smart way to incorporate this pre-existing IP into a new story. Likewise, some of the scares were genuinely good. Particularly the scarecrow and the pimple. What I think was lacking in the movie, was any real commitment to flesh out the story. It’s hinted at a couple of times that the stories have particular meaning for the people. The jock really hating the scarecrow for instance. Or that the one friend could feel neglected by his family, making the toe scarier. Instead, none of it is developed. They just go straight into the scares. The fact that there were so many unanswered plot lines just because there will be a sequel is so bad. It’s bad movie-making. What can you do? I still had fun.
Grade: D Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark – André Øvredal (2019)
13th: Baby Face – Alfred E. Green (1933)
Watched at home. Before this film, I didn’t know about Pre-Code Hollywood. It was apparently a brief era between the silent era and 1934 in which there wasn’t much censorship. That would add up. The storyline of Baby Face was surprisingly edgy. I think in some ways, it’s doing what The Love Witch was going for. Turning preconceived notions of gender roles and sexuality on the story to make a point. Here though, these messages are fully engrained in the story. It doesn’t feel like watching a meta-commentary on societal structures. It feels like watching a movie. I really enjoyed watching it. I especially dug that it was like 75 minutes. I’m still wary of the melodrama of most of these 30s and 40s films. I think it’s engrained in the era, but isn’t my favorite type of storytelling.
Grade: B Baby Face – Alfred E Green (1933)
14th: Howl’s Moving Castle – Hayao Miyazaki (2004)
Watched at home with Gioia. This was my first Miyazaki / Studio Ghibli film. It was delightful! Based on my own silly assumptions, I expected it to be weightier. I was afraid that with the reverence people have for these movies, its messages would be telegraphed on to it. Instead, I found this film to be so lighthearted, spontaneous and joyous. It felt completely free of any messaging. That’s not to say that the film doesn’t touch on weighty themes or isn’t worth critical thought. It absolutely is. But I really loved how the characters moved through life and the story without a lot of external motives. For instance, there wasn’t any heartfelt moment of pain when Sophie is transformed into an old woman. Instead, she just goes out to solve the problem. We know that she wants to be changed back and the movie doesn’t try to explain that she would. It’s intuitive. My favorite parts of the movie were its eccentricities. They were so surprising and fun. If I had a critique, it would be that the logic of the story isn’t airtight. I didn’t understand a ton of the plot. In this type of movie though, it really didn’t matter. I was having too much fun with the peripheral details to care.
Grade: B+ Howl’s Moving Castle – Hayao Miyazaki (2004)
17th: Blinded by the Light – Gurinder Chada (2019)
Watched at the Nickelodeon with Gioia, my dad, Barbara, Sophia, and Tom. I don’t know where to begin. Bruce Springsteen is obviously an enormous figure to me. To watch a film try to present and unpack a fan’s relationship with his music is one thing. To try to think about it objectively is another. Overall, I really liked it. I recognized and understood all the reasons that Javed felt such devotion to Bruce and his music. I honestly just liked hearing Springsteen played super loud in a movie theater. I thought the move smartly poked fun at Javed and his devotion. I think it also recognized that this type of relationship can happen between anything. It’s essentially the magic of life to find something that speaks so deeply to you. The film was extraordinarily earnest and that really worked for it. I think the ending is deeply emotional. That tone also means that so much of the film borders right on the edge of embarrassment. As much as I love Thunder Road, Badlands, and Born to Run, it’s hard to watch a teenager sing it so earnestly to the people he loves. I don’t know what else to say. Bruce is the best, and I’m glad this movie was so good.
Grade: B / B+ Blinded by the Light – Gurinder Chada (2019)
22nd: Akira Kurosawa’s Dreams – Akira Kurosawa (1990)
Watched at work. It is really, really slow-moving. I was kind of amazed at how slowly Kurosawa develops some scenes. Specifically, the Mountain / Blizzard one. It pushed me to try and not look at my phone during it. But, it seems like this slowness is very much the point. Many of the dreams are about the downfalls of technological advancement. In the last dream, that point is stated explicitly. I think the pace is a challenge to hold our attention and find the beauty in it. The simple pleasures as it were. I noticed a lot of the scenes provided a moment of catharsis for its characters. Moments that in real life could never happen. I’m thinking specifically of the boy getting to scream and cry about the Peach Blossoms or the soldier confessing his guilt at the dead platoon. I liked it. The film starts with a somber wedding (for foxes!) and ends with a joyous funeral (for a woman :/). Thought those were cool bookends to the film. I don’t think I’ll ever watch this again. It really was a slog at times to get through it. There is certainly a lot of depth to it, but maybe not enough for me to revisit it.
Grade: C+ / B-
22nd: Performance – Donald Cammell and Nicolas Roeg (1970)
Watched at home. It’s exhilarating. The way it is shot and edited seems exceedingly modern. It reminded me of films by Tarantino, Fincher, and Soderbergh. Those films obviously all come 20 years after this. I honestly couldn’t understand about half of the dialogue and am not sure it truly mattered. So much of this movie is a vibe. I think you could definitely go through the script and find a constructed crime film in there, but the real highlights for me were the fast cuts, strange edits, and wild energy spilling out of the film. Also, Mick Jagger is phenomenal.
Grade: B+ / A- Performance – Donald Cammell and Nicolas Roeg (1970)
25th: Harold and Maude – Hal Ashby (1971)
Watched at home. It’s delightful. It’s so funny, odd, and heartfelt. The movie was actually pretty straightforward, but it felt so bizarre due to all its eccentricities. On top of that, everything in the film is brilliantly structured. The film opens with Harold faking suicide and ends with him deciding against it. I loved that there’s never any scene in which Harold and Maude’s relationship is judged. The closest we come is Harold’s mother’s reaction. Even then, Maude isn’t there. It’s so positive and humanistic, even in the face of so much death and gloom. The musical cues work really well down to Harold picking up the banjo and strumming Cat Stevens. A total classic.
Grade: A- Harold and Maude – Hal Ashby (1971)
25th: First Man – Damien Chazelle (2018)
It now makes sense to me that this film didn’t receive any accolades. It’s slow, methodical, and (pardon the pun) grounded. That doesn’t make the lack of awards right. This film is masterful. I really think Chazelle is one of the best filmmakers working right now. His approach here is to focus on the tiny, human details of this mission. There are no grand flourishes, no overtures. There’s not a triumph in beating the Soviets to space. Instead, there’s a reflection on the price to pay for it. He focuses on the silences, on the literal nuts and bolts holding the ship together. Armstrong isn’t a patriotic hero. He’s a quiet genius. Buzz Aldrin isn’t an infallible 2nd in command. He’s a wise-cracking cynic. It makes sense that this film wasn’t a hit. It’s a methodical examination on how we got to the moon. It’s a quiet triumph.
Grade: B+ / A- First Man – Damien Chazelle (2018)
27th: Christopher Strong – Dorothy Arzner (1933)
Watched at work. In a lot of 30s and 40s films, I struggle with their melodramatic tone. It’s just something that hasn’t clicked for me. I feel that it usually takes away from the story. What’s the worst thing that could happen? It happens. Christopher Strong definitely has melodrama in it. But it totally works for me. I think perhaps because so much of it is re-directed or subverted. There’s a scene in which Monica leaves the party with a random dude who talks about how much he’s been drinking. In any other movie, I think she dies in a car crash. Here there is a major consequence, but it’s that her boyfriend leaves her because she confesses to sleeping with this man. Likewise, I think other movies begin the affair at the end of Act 1. Here, the main tension isn’t the affair, but whether or not the two characters can hold out before engaging in it. It was brilliant. Christopher Strong – Dorothy Arzner (1933)
27th: Spirited Away – Hayao Miyazaki (2002)
Watched at home with Gioia. I felt like I’d have some idea of this movie going into it. It’s so renowned. I’ve seen probably a dozen stills from it. There is so much No-Face merch in the world. Plus, I had seen Howl’s Moving Castle earlier and thought I’d have a grasp on these movies. I was wrong. It was so surprising. My biggest misconception was not realizing how understated this movie would be. Of course, there are spirits, talking animals, witches, and so much magic. All of these just move you through the story. They aren’t disruptive. Amidst all of this, Chihiro goes through an incredible personal transformation and it’s never explicitly commented on. It’s the whole emotional force of the film and it is seamlessly interwoven into the story. My favorite decision in Howl’s Moving Castle was that Sophie never laments her curse or has a dramatic moment to ruminate on it. It’s the same here. We see that Chihiro is ignored by her parents and is underestimated and condescended to by everyone at the spa. But it’s never reflected on. There is no moment for her to cry out about these injustices. At the end, when she has finally earned respect and friendship, she has to leave the spa to go back to her parents. Finally, there will be the moment where Chihiro reflects and laments how life always pushes forward and leaves everything behind. And then there’s a literal rule that she can’t look back or the magic won’t work. It’s so brilliant and true to life. Most importantly, it’s so much more heartfelt than in every other movie in which there’d be an engineered bullshit moment where she looks back at the spa and all her friends.
Grade: A Spirited Away – Hayao Miyazaki (2002)
28th: Gone Girl – David Fincher (2014)
Watched at home. The first 2/3rds of the film are perfect. Totally mesmerizing, meticulously executed. It’s impeccably crafted. Every moment of the film can be read multiple ways. The film leads you down avenues even while you’re wary of making conclusions. I especially liked as Nick and Amy’s stories started to diverge. You realized that this isn’t a film with one perspective or truth. And this idea is what the film is centered on. The idea that you never truly know anyone else’s point of view. The twist in the middle is an all-timer. I had even suspected that’s where it was going having waited a few years to see the movie, and it was still stunning. It’s a perfect moment not just because of everything that builds up to it, but because of the execution there. Amy’s monologue is so smart and cutting. Even though she is a psychopath, you completely understand her motive. I do think the movie falters once Amy loses control. Fincher is trying to do something more ambitious and interesting than resolving a traditional mystery. Here, he wants to incorporate aspects of satire and social commentary. Most of which work. Still, I find that this part of the film doesn’t add up to the thrill of the first two hours when Nick (and the viewer) is in Amy’s web. The exception is the murder of Desi which is shocking and grotesque. To me, this is certainly Fincher’s third-best movie. I would still put it a good distance behind Zodiac and The Social Network. While it’s not a masterpiece, it’s arguably his most ambitious movie and has many aspects that are perfect.
Grade: B+ / A- Gone Girl – David Fincher (2014)
29th: Matador – Pedro Almodóvar (1986)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s really something else. Almodóvar is so stylistically assured. He hits you with his vision immediately. Sex and violence are interwoven so they don’t make complete sense. From there, we move into our story. It’s a fairly tight story. Ángel turns himself in for these murders in an attempt to prove his manhood. There, his visions lead everybody to the two murderers: his teacher and his lawyer, who are almost star-crossed sexual deviants. Throughout it, he uses the metaphor of bullfighting and interwoven into the story are themes of emasculation, toxic masculinity, and sexuality. The aspects of the story that are hard to believe (which are many) are almost completely covered by camp, humor, and stylistic flourishes. Overall, I was really impressed. I think it’s incredibly impressive on paper. There are some moments that are a tad slow or too telegraphed to be truly surprising. My guess is that Almodóvar tightens these aspects up in his future films.
Grade: B Matador – Pedro Almodóvar (1986)
30th: Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown – Pedro Almodóvar (1988)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s insane how much tighter Almodóvar becomes in just two years. While I really liked Matador there were definitely slower parts. Its mastery was in the way the whole story unfolded. Still, some of its scenes were lacking. Every detail in Women… feels meticulously reworked to perfection. As with Matador, the sets and costumes here are all bright and beautiful. The performances are tremendous. Every detail that comes up in the film reappears at the precise right moment. It’s a movie made out of setups and payoffs. The working of the plot feels like something out of Oscar Wilde. It is remarkable. I’m sad I didn’t catch more of Almodóvar’s movies when they were on the Criterion Channel. He seems like one of the greats.
Grade: A Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown – Pedro Almodóvar (1988)
31st: The Farewell – Lulu Wang (2019)
Watched at the Logan with Gioia. I liked it. The performances were really powerful. The set up of the family was incredibly well thought out. Without too much exposition, you felt like you knew how each family member fit in and their relationship to this decision. I also really liked seeing a movie set in China. I thought it was fascinating to navigate the city and family with Billi. My big critique is this: I felt they really stretched this central tension as far as it could go. It seemed every scene was someone debating whether or not they would tell Nai Nai she was dying. Gioia made the point that it’s probably true to life. Anytime a family or a friend group has a secret, it tends to be the only thing people talked about. Still, the movie hinted at other tensions I would have loved to see explored. The pull Billi feels between the two countries. The toll following your own pursuits costs: in this case leaving your family. I felt this movie took about a 75-minute story and stretched it to 90 minutes. What I would have been more interested in, ironically, is seeing this story really expand. What’s the 135-minute version of this film? Still, the ending was incredibly moving. I was so thankful they never had a scene in which Nai Nai and Billi confront each other over this secret. I am convinced that Nai Nai knew about the secret even though it’s never shown or commented in the movie. That’s good filmmaking.
Grade: B / B+ The Farewell – Lulu Wang (2019)
6th: Midsommar – Ari Aster (2019)
Watched at Regal City with Wills and Gioia. An incredible movie. I have never seen anything like it. The only thing that would come close is Aster’s other film Hereditary. He is just a master at so many aspects of storytelling. For example, he uses this brilliant misdirection at the very start of the film. He spells out exactly what is going to happen to this family, and yet when you see it it’s still shocking. It binds you completely to Dani’s pain. Likewise, there’s an incredible scene about 35 minutes into the film. Two of the characters die in stunning fashion. Yet, it’s all spelled out clearly. It’s always exactly what’s going to happen. But like the group of Americans watching, you just keep going along, oblivious to it all until it hits. And like the scene earlier, you feel the same residual effects as the characters. I felt numb for 25 minutes after it. The film is so brilliantly conceived and thought out. The main group of characters is perfect. From the beginning of the film they each act in the same selfish way. It’s just masked by the traumatic murder/suicide at the start. You’re unaware if they’re acting strangely because of the situation, or because they’re American assholes. This is the type of movie where even writing all of this, I feel like I’ve only scratched the surface. The themes and message of the film are so complex and fascinating. And every moment in the movie reflects it. All the while it’s so entertaining, funny, and hypnotizing. It is by far the best movie I’ve seen this year.
Grade: A Midsommar – Ari Aster (2019)
7th: Girlfriends – Claudia Weill (1978)
Watched at home by myself. It’s a beautiful story. It is a prototype of so many stories I love from Girls to Frances Ha. Yet, it doesn’t feel rudimentary or underdeveloped. Rather, it feels essential and true. It’s the type of movie that once you see it, you feel like you’ve always known or had seen it before. I found Suzie to be so charming. I was so connected to her story even though her life has little resemblance to my own. Overall, it was just a beautiful character study.
Grade: A- Girlfriends – Claudia Weill (1978)
15th: Nashedonia – Will Berry (2017)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program. This one was pretty incredible. Felt the most in line with the tone we went for in Friendpage, but done much tighter. The short is essentially one joke that’s just perfectly told.
15th: The Sound of a Wild Snail Eating – Elisabeth Tova Bailey (2019)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program. A really beautiful short. A couple of components stood out to me. First, is just the writing/narration which is so thoughtful and poetic. It made a lot of sense to learn that this had developed from an essay and then a memoir. Second, was the photography of the snails which was amazing to watch.
15th: Three / Four – Gordon LePage (2019)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program. A delightfully funny stop motion short. The balance between the animation and the story is really perfect. It’s bursting at the seams with energy. It’s something I guess that would come from how precise the filmmaking has to be. It really reminded me how you much life there is in exploring the positive nature of a character as opposed to something more cynical.
15th: The Grey Zone – Brian Gersten (2018)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program. A really interesting documentary. It was well made too. Out of the shorts I saw, this seems like the most likely to develop into a feature. The documentary did a great job at presenting so many angles to this one issue. I hope that he does do something else with it.
15th: Night of the Fluffet – Raymond Wallace (2018)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program. This was probably the most visually polished film out of everything in the program. I loved the referential tone this short had. And as silly as the concept was, the special effects behind the fluffet looked incredible. I don’t think the short could have worked if it didn’t look this good.
15th: About John – Lauren Shaw (2019)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program. Maybe the most moving film I saw during the festival. I loved the approach to the documentary. John’s poetry was so beautiful. I think it captured him more than a traditional interview-style documentary could have. The filmmaking was really nicely done. You could tell there was a lot of affection and reverence for John in it.
15th: Deciduous Impotence – Martha Campbell (2018)
Part of the MIFF – Maine Shorts program though it definitely should have been in the Uncommon Visions section. A really cool concept for an experimental film. The visuals were arresting and the idea of the person in the costume added some levity to it.
16th: Midnight Family – Luke Lorentzen (2019)
A feature that was shown at MIFF. It’s one of the best family films I’ve ever seen. Without any exposition, I felt that I knew everyone’s role and personality in the family. Which was a great approach to take, given the subject of the documentary. Going into the film, I knew so little about EMT’s in America, let alone their privatized nature in Mexico’s health care system. The family provided such a good window into this world. By being so connected to the characters (or subjects as it is technically a documentary), you could really explore how it felt to operate within this system. It’s a tactic I had never considered in a documentary, and it proved so effective here. I was also struck by so many of the visuals. It was hard to remember at times that this was a documentary. Totally blown away by this one.
Grade: A
16th: Hers is a Lush Situation – Samuel Valenti (2018)
Part of the MIFF Uncommon Visions program. This was such a cool, sleek film. As soon as Samuel mentioned Chungking Express in the Q&A it really clicked for me. It totally operated in that style. There was certainly a story and an arc to hold on to, but this one was centered on feeling more than anything else.
16th: The Dressing – Patrick Moser (2019)
Part of the MIFF Uncommon Visions program. I was really into this one. It follows a couple of cardboard monsters with some really trippy sound effects. Although there wasn’t any dialogue, I felt latched onto a story. More than anything, I loved the look of it. The cardboard pieces were so funny and evocative. I was pretty blown away.
16th: Alma Bandita – Marco Antonio Pereira (2019)
Part of the MIFF Uncommon Visions program. This one came from Brazil which was so cool. The storytelling felt in line with Hers is a Lush Situation. There were characters and a story but its telling was fragmented enough to place emotion over logic.
16th: The Sacred Union – Tom Snelgrove (2018)
Part of the MIFF Uncommon Visions program. This one was from Mongolia. Probably the most experimental thing I saw (if you can even qualify something like that). This one was all about the vibe. I think to attach any type of logic to it in the moment is impossible. It requires you to give yourself over to it.
16th: Don’t Save – Davey Rocco (2018)
Part of the MIFF Uncommon Visions program. This one was simple. Just 1 minute of deleting photos. I loved it.
16th: Eidolon – Louise Milne (2018)
Part of the MIFF Uncommon Visions program. Another international one too! This one coming from the UK. I was really into this one. It was a bunch of really cool Super 8 footage soundtracked by repeated classical texts. I think of all the shorts, this one seemed the most self-assured, which is wild considering it’s essentially found footage. But the images chosen, along with the readings were so confident in tone.
16th: His Master’s Voice – György Pálfi (2018)
A feature shown at MIFF. It is a Hungarian / Canadian co-production. It is also maybe the best film I’ve seen all year. The film was so unique, I felt completely immersed in it. There was never any part where an actor, a reference, or a song even took me out of the movie. In some ways, the characters in the film felt more “real” to me than the ones in Midnight Family. Which I think is a testament to what both films were working to accomplish. The film did such a smart job of foregrounding all of its characters. It allowed for all of the really heavy Sci-fi and fantastical moments to work. I could watch this film ten more times and come up with new interpretations. I hope I get the chance to watch it again.
Grade: B+ / A-
19th: Moneyball – Bennett Miller (2011)
Watched at Gioia’s. It’s really surprising. It’s a sports movie that’s completely understated. Which so perfectly fits and encapsulates the message of the movie: substance over flash, deeper meanings, etc. I can’t think of another sports movie that’s so muted. Maybe there are elements of that in Bull Durham or Everybody Wants Some!!. It’s hard for me to exactly pinpoint where the magic is coming from in Moneyball. Right now, I’ve landed on Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill’s characters. They’re both so likable, and maybe most importantly, right. I think their belief in this system is what you latch on to as an audience. Aside from all of this, I should mention that the movie is really fun. Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill’s dynamic is charming and even quite funny at times. The baseball scenes look great. I think it’s in the running for one of my favorite movies from the decade.
Grade: A Moneyball – Bennett Miller (2011)
20th: A Quiet Place – John Krasinski (2018)
Watched at home with Gioia. I am in on this movie. I do think there are holes with the logic. Why not find a soundproof studio? Why not live near a waterfall if that masks sounds? If you can move past those questions, the plot of the film is good. I love the dynamic with the family. That the daughter is deaf makes a whole lot of sense. The fact that her implant pays off at the end of the film is brilliant. I like the pressure of trying to give birth silently and how to maneuver around that. I also was a fan of the cuts between the family at different times. The lighting system and the fireworks bit were great. There are a hundred things I could nitpick, but the movie probably doesn’t work if it tries to answer them.
Grade: B- A Quiet Place – John Krasinski (2018)
21st: Bottle Rocket – Wes Anderson (1996)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s so smart. Much more so than I remember. The script is really just airtight. Especially given that’s it’s centered around Dignan who is not the most logical agent. More than anything, I love the theme of the film. Enthusiasm vs. cynicism feels more timely than ever. I think it really makes the movie in a lot of ways. I don’t know if you can buy into any of the plot if you don’t buy into Dignan and this idea. I love it. It may be my favorite first film by any director.
Grade: A
21st: Rupture (short) -Pierre Etaix and Jean-Claude Carrière (1961)
Wills showed me this short! It’s insane how much milage the film gets out of a simple task. Just one gag after another and they all mostly work.
21st: Monsieur Hulot’s Holiday – Jacques Tati (1953)
Watched at home. It’s so delightful. There’s no plot. It’s just a group of French vacationers and Mr. Hulot. The gags are so funny. Even funnier than I expected. My favorites were Hulot climbing up the stairs with the bag and the fox carpet getting stuck on his boot. What I am so surprised by is how much heart the film has. It’s really a contemplation on human existence. Sorry if that sounds too college freshman-y. But the film really is examining how attached to work and structure society is, even at this time. So much so, that only Hulot and a few others really appreciate being on vacation. And as weighty as all that sounds, it’s never preachy or judgemental. It’s really all fun and the butt of the joke is almost always Hulot. I don’t know how to really contextualize it, but it felt more akin to a novel or a play as opposed to a movie. I’m pretty blown away.
28th: Once Upon a Time…In Hollywood – Quentin Tarantino (2019)
It’s so weird processing a Tarantino movie in real-time. This is the third one (Django, Hateful Eight) where I had been anticipating the movie forever, and while watching the movie, already thinking about how it fits into Tarantino’s filmography. Is it living up to the hype? How does it fit into his world? There are directors I like more than Tarantino but there aren’t any other directors whose work I feel as compelled to see as soon as possible.
I loved watching it. I was also hyper-aware that so much of it stemmed from factors outside the actual story of the movie. I got so much mileage just out of the actors in this movie. And that ranged from seeing DiCaprio and Pitt together down to seeing Timothy Olyphant, Lena Dunham, Maya Hawke, Al Pacino, and Dakota Fanning show up.
Similarly, I loved all of the driving and the music that went with it. The first driving scene where the tunes changed every street was wild. I half expected him to throw in a Beatles song just to show off how much money he could put into it. It’s a long way from him blowing his entire music budget just to get “Stuck in the Middle With You” into Reservoir Dogs.
Again, these are all just factors that operate outside the script and the story. As much as I loved it, I was constantly wondering if anyone that’s not a Tarantino fan would be into it. I realize most everyone likes cars, music, and movie stars. But I’m curious if it bothered anyone how much Tarantino really shows off in this movie?
Tarantino is hyper-aware that this is a Tarantino movie. Going into this film I expected that it would fall in line with Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained. A wishful, violent, profane, re-write of history. But as the movie rolled along I completely moved away from this expectation. I was so delighted by how muted, sentimental, and heartfelt this movie felt compared to so much of his work. It’s probably the warmest movie he’s ever made (besides Jackie Brown?) By the time the Manson family shows up, I really thought that they were going to go through with the murder. And I thought it would finish on a sad, sentimental note about not being able to change this tragic event.
But alas, I’m probably just a fool. I talked to one of my coworkers about the ending and he said: “Of course it was going to end like that, it’s a Tarantino movie.” But I truly believed it wouldn’t. Which made the ending pretty incredible (at least for me)!
I probably should have seen it coming but I was genuinely surprised. Stunned even. I feel like Tarantino essentially lulled me into thinking this was the movie that would be different in his filmography. And when it ended in the most Tarantino-esque manner possible, I was somehow blown (and flame-thrown) away.
Grade: A
30th: The Love Witch – Anna Biller (2016)
Watched at home with Gioia. I’m not quite sure what to make of the movie. First off, it’s definitely an homage, parody, and tribute to a certain type of 60s film. The problem with that, for me, is that I haven’t seen a ton these films. In essence, I’m not fluent with the language of the movie. Still, I loved the look of the film. The shots, wardrobes, and color were really striking. I did find the story hard to watch. This isn’t a straightforward movie. The dialogue is intentionally awkward and clunky. It’s playing off a style of film to make a contemporary point. The problem is that it can feel like sitting through a pretty bad movie to be delivered a message. I tend to not love irony in films most of the time anyway. So I think this is a movie I like in theory much more than in reality. I thought the metaphors and message of the movie were really thoughtful and poignant. Again, I just didn’t really enjoy watching the vehicle delivering the message.
Grade: C
True Detective (Season 3) – Nic Pizzolatto (HBO)
The set up in this season was brilliantly designed. The conclusion, I think was less so. I think I enjoyed the week-to-week speculation about it more than the series itself. Which is not to say that the series wasn’t enjoyable. Mahershala Ali and Stephen Dorff were incredible. The series used a three timeline structure surprisingly well. My overall issue is that I think the questions and mystery proved more interesting than the answer. Pizzolatto is interested in a dynamic between isolated life and broader conspiracy. The allusions to other crimes, other towns, and other seasons of the show aren’t an accident. The conclusion of this season is that this particular crime was an isolated incident, a series of accidents. I hope this means that Pizzolatto is waiting for a future season to connect these crimes and actually dive into the larger conspiracy he keeps hinting at. My fear is that he’s more interested in making a commentary on the nature of true crime and theorizing. If that’s the case, I think it’s pretty dicey. He’s clearly using those tropes to drive his show on. To then say, “Wait a sec, this isn’t right” seems pretty weak sauce to me. Regardless, I’m still probably on board for Season 4.
Grade: B- / B
My Brilliant Friend – Saverio Costanzo (HBO)
I found this miniseries to be surprisingly compelling. To be clear, I love the novel and series the show is based on. My concern with this adaption is that those novels are so interior. Their defining characteristic is how the protagonist relates her world to the reader. Adaptations are risky for a million reasons. I thought the stakes of this show would be even riskier. Its first conceit would be relating the world for us. It mostly works. The show is beautifully shot, the actors are both fantastic and well-cast to the characters. The show is rigidly faithful to the book, and the pacing works well. My few knocks are pretty basic. There’s nothing mind-blowing about the show. Nothing incredibly compelling that makes you have to watch more. Instead, it’s a pretty good show, made exceptionally well. That works on its own. Compared to the novel it falls short.
Grade: B-
Veep (Season 7)- David Mandel (HBO)
Veep has to be one of the most consistent shows of all time. Its final season was no exception. It is so brutally funny. Like most shows, its later seasons became more and more a product of itself. Thus, Season 7 was the most outrageous. The characters were the worst possible versions of themselves. I think it worked beautifully. Two decisions they made really stood out to me. First, I loved that they doubled down and just paralleled our current political situation. I think it’s a decision that wouldn’t work in many other shows. Here, I think the world of the show is actually more outrageous, so it feels almost natural. Second, I loved that they had so many great actors and comedians come and do bit parts. It’s such a flex but it totally worked. I don’t think this was a top two or three season for the show, but that would be such an impossibly high bar. I just felt grateful that the season was back and that it was still good.
Grade: B / B+
Trigger Warning – Killer Mike (Netflix)
This series was so surprising, spectacular, and enlightening. I still don’t know if I’ve fully comprehended it. I love Killer Mike and Run the Jewels and still had no expectation that the show would be this good. It’s a wonderful and common premise. Mike takes a look at something that isn’t right and explains it. It’s the same set up as almost any talk show. What sets this show miles apart is that Mike not only offers a solution but goes and enacts it. And these solutions are mostly batshit crazy. But there’s some wisdom and truth in all of them. I feel like he is doing what postmodernist authors try to do. A couple of the episodes aren’t as good as the others, but overall this series was incredible. I hope there’s more.
Grade: A
Pen15 – Maya Erskine, Anna Konkle, Sam Zvibleman (Hulu)
This show hinges upon a unique and pretty daring structural conceit. The two main characters are adults playing middle schoolers. It’s brilliant. Yet, for as radical as this twist is, in almost every other way this show feels pretty old school. Which is not to knock anything about the themes the show is exploring, or how vulnerable the show makes its characters and by extension the audience. In fact, I think it’s this conceit that really opens up the show’s ability to explore these themes. It’s old school in the best way possible. It’s almost a straight sitcom: the situation is middle school, comedy ensues. I love sitcoms and this is the best one I’ve seen in a long, long time. I really found this show to be viscerally funny.
Grade: B+ / A-
Killing Eve (Season 1* & 2) – Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Emerald Fennell (BBC America)
An exceptionally well-done thriller. The two stars are incredible and more than carry the show. Jodie Comer is a delight to watch. Villanelle is such a funny, compelling villain. I would watch a whole show with just her and no real stakes. What sets the show apart is Sandra Oh’s ability to play off of her. It’s so nuanced and subtle. Here, I will acknowledge that the plot is outrageous, contrived, unbelievable, etc. I don’t think it matters. The show is so true to its characters that I’m okay to work with these faults.
Grade: A-
*Aired 2018
Game of Thrones (Season 8) – David Benioff, D.B Weiss (HBO)
An unmitigated disaster. I acknowledged before the season that pulling off this final season would be a near-impossible feat. I expected that the plane would crash into the runway. I did not anticipate it’d burst into flames over the ocean. I am torn because I love Game of Thrones. I have loved it, even simply, as a TV show. Even to the end, I couldn’t wait for each episode. I thought the second episode, “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms” was one of the show’s finest moments. On the other hand, it’s really inconceivable to me how the show could have ended this poorly. Making good television is an extraordinary feat. It’s really hard. That’s why there isn’t very much of it. But it is shocking to me how something as beloved, and elaborately produced as Thrones, would be capable of ending this badly.
Grade: D
Tuca & Bertie – Lisa Hanawalt (Netflix)
The most pleasant, delightful show I’ve watched all year. The animation is wonderful. The characters are vibrant. Everything about the show is so full of enthusiasm and life. It’s infectious. And that’s not to say this show doesn’t have real weight to it. Almost all of the episodes tackle a pressing issue. It will undoubtedly be compared to BojackHorseman because of its creator and the animation. But I think the real comparison lies in its ability to pull off the balance between absurdity and real issues in a way that few shows besides Bojack have done. And in fact, I think I like the tone of Tuca & Bertie a bit more. I’m glad it’s a just a little lighter than Bojack. It’s one of the things I feel like is a big improvement. More on that next…
Grade: B+
BoJack Horseman (Season 5) – Raphael Bob-Waksberg (Netflix)* BoJack has such a strange trajectory to it. I remember in the first season telling my cousin AJ that he should check out the show because it had crazy anthropomorphic animals and lots of puns. The show still has that in Season 5 but has so much more heaviness to it. In this season, the show explores issues of mental illness, substance abuse, misogyny, and depression more thoroughly than any other show I can remember. I think, for the most part, these explorations are worthwhile and enlightening. But while I really appreciate that aspect, I couldn’t help but feel a bit bogged down by it. You couldn’t help but feel suffocated by how dark and depressing the show has become. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Still, I found myself not having the urgency to come back for each episode because of it.
Grade: B-
*Aired in 2018
I Think You Should Leave – Tim Robinson (Netflix)
Easily my favorite thing I have watched all year. This show is so fucking funny. As someone who doesn’t watch improv or sketch comedy, here is my understanding of it. Each sketch starts out with a setup or premise and then presents a complication. Literally joke-telling 101. And here, you think a lot of the genius is just in these outlandish premises. They’re so weird it really could be. This is what I think the idea is behind most SNL sketches. And in this show, it’s the idea of a Baby of the Year competition or someone taking a bumper sticker too seriously. But the true genius of this show is that the sketches all take another turn. In most cases, the punchline or resolution is a complete twist. The bystander who is reacting to the bizarre setup has, in fact, gone along with it. The joke is back on the other person. Take the focus group sketch. It’s a normal group of people with one very old, bizarre, Italian man who keeps offering up the worst ideas. So you think the joke is just that there’s this insane person in an otherwise normal situation. But as he starts making fun of one of the other participants, you realize that everybody else in the room is on board with him. They’re playing by his rules. The joke is not on him but on the “normal man”. I have watched the entire show three times and these sketches still keep getting funnier and funnier. It takes a minute to calibrate to Robinson’s style, but once you do, it’s incredible.
Grade: A
Fleabag (Seasons 1* & 2) – Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Amazon)
Let’s get this out of the way. The first season of the show is overrated. Which is to say I liked it. But I did not understand where all of the hype was coming from. It’s a really well-written, dark show that tackles heavy subjects: substance abuse, self-abuse, grief. But I didn’t love the conceit of her breaking the fourth wall. I found Fleabag and the people around her to be a little too terrible for me to grapple with. The first season was a solid B for me. A good show, but not my favorite.
The second season is amazing. I don’t know how she recalibrated it, but every decision is brilliant. Again, I did not like her asides to the camera in Season 1. In Season 2, I couldn’t get enough of them. I couldn’t get on board with the characters in Season 1. In Season 2, I found their individual struggles to be heartbreaking. Moreover, everything about the show was scaled up. It’s evident right away in which the entire first episode takes place at a dinner party. Fleabag is a show that I don’t have much connection to. I’m not on the same wavelength. It’s not always hitting me right in my soul. Yet, it is undeniably brilliant. Every aspect of its storytelling and filmmaking is an 11/10. I’m so glad I stuck with it.
*Aired 2016
Grade: A- / A
Deadwood (Season 1*) – David Milch (HBO)
With all of the hype around the Deadwood film, I decided to finally dive into the show. For me, I’d put the first season right below the prestige TV heavyweights (Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Sopranos, etc.). So what’s brilliant about it? The tone of the show lives up to the hype. Ian McShane’s brutal, profanity-laced, tirades are incredible. You’re sucked into the world of Deadwood. You’re calibrated for the rules (or lack thereof) of the town and of the show. The beginning of the series is a thrill. I loved the decision to kill Wild Bill Hickock. It’s a stunning moment. And one that I didn’t see coming given that this show aired in 2004. I do think the plot loses a little steam after his death. I’m interested to see if they can refocus it in Season 2.
So what is it that holds the show back for me? I think the characters aren’t as fully realized as I would like them to be. Or perhaps, not compelling enough. This show reminds me in a lot of ways of Mad Men. It’s a huge ensemble, each with various roles, that all revolve around this one place. In Mad Men, it’s Sterling-Cooper. In Deadwood, it’s the town. But the best part of Mad Men is the characters. I would have kept watching if there were no plot. In Deadwood, there are many brilliant performances, but fewer dynamic characters. For as masterful as Ian McShane is, Al Swearengen is kind of a one-note person. Seth Bullock, to take it further, is almost the literal definition of a one-note character. There are some exceptions. I love the doc and think that the widow is fully developed too. But it’s a weakness in an otherwise pretty exceptional show.
Grade: B / B+
* Aired 2004
Chernobyl – Craig Mazin (HBO)
The best show I’ve seen in some time. Chernobyl is every accolade you could laud a show with. It’s fully-realized, perfectly pitched, poignant, devastating, sensitive, intriguing, and respectful. I think every decision that Mazin makes is the right one. It’s an incredible accomplishment. Especially given that this is a recent historical event. He is so respectful to all involved in the disaster without pulling any punches about the negligence that led us here. I thought the dynamic between the Soviet Union and the United States was really interesting. While the show acknowledges that this event happened in, and in large part because of, the Soviet Union, it also makes a compelling case that the heroics needed to stop it were only possible there too. I loved how Mazin doled out enough information for the viewer to understand the stakes in each episode but held on to the full truth of what had happened until the end. It was a lasting and powerful message. Last year, my favorite film was First Reformed in large part because it felt like the most relevant film I had seen. It spoke so clearly to the anxieties of being alive in the 21st century that it made other films feel non-essential. That’s what Chernobyl feels like compared to other television. Yes, it’s a show documenting a 25-year-old historical event. But it’s also a show about truth and lies, the responsibilities of the state, man vs nature, the danger belied in the promise of technology. There was no show more relevant this year and Mazin made sure that every punch this show had would hit at full force.
Grade: A
Barry (Season 2) – Bill Hader, Alec Berg (HBO) Barry is no longer a comedy. Thankfully, it is still great. While most of the show worked for me, I realize I am more compelled by the actual filmmaking than the story. I enjoyed following Barry and Sally’s struggles to progress as actors. Henry Winkler is still a delight. Noho Hank is the funniest villain on television. But what I really loved about the show was everything leading in and out of “Ronny/Lily,” the best episode of T.V. this year. Loach’s reveal that he wanted Barry to kill Ronny was perfectly set up. Each development in the episode was stunningly funny. It was a perfect 30-minute horror movie. So while there were no real disappointments in the season, I couldn’t feel like it was all a bit overshadowed by a perfect episode. Definitely not the worst problem to have.
Grade: B+
Stranger Things (Season 3) – The Duffer Brothers (Netflix)
The third season is a return to form in every single way. And in some cases, an improvement even on Season 1. The best decision, by far, is to split the kids up. The season consisted of multiple storylines. Miraculously, each of them was pretty compelling. So while part of me (all of me) would be down for an entire show of just Steve, Dustin, and Robin, I was never disappointed to be hanging out with Janice and Hopper, the other kids, or Nancy and Jonathan. Likewise, I loved the decision to make the entire season essentially all one day. While I’m not always sold that’s a good thing, here there were so many characters and storylines, I’m glad that time wasn’t a factor. More than that, I loved that they got each character into the best possible wardrobe and kept them in it. Were there faults in the season? It depends on how closely you want to read the show. The sci-fi/fantasy elements are, at best, loosely defined. Will’s character existed this season just to warn people about the Mind Flayer or react to those around him. Hopper and Janice’s character turns don’t really hold up to scrutiny. Yet, I think with the way I watch the show, these are all strengths. The surface level sci-fi is enough for me. It keeps the plot and characters moving which is really what I care about. Will didn’t get to be a kid this season, but his reaction to that was pretty moving. Hopper and Janice both acted outside their usual arcs, but it was a welcome change. This season was so big and ambitious that there were plenty of holes. There’s just no way you could make a story this big and told so compactly that there wouldn’t be. For me, I’m glad they’re there. Stranger Things is meant to be a fun binge watch. This season was the best version of that.
Grade: A-
The Knick (Season 1*) – Steven Soderbergh (Cinemax)
Though I had only heard great things, I wasn’t sure what to expect in a television show from Steven Soderbergh. While it’s pretty common for a feature filmmaker to produce a show, it’s usually just to direct the pilot and establish the visual language. After that, the show is typically left to the writers to create the rest of the series in the image of the pilot. That was the case, for example, with Martin Scorsese in Boardwalk Empire or David Fincher in House of Cards. I suppose the other model for a filmmaker doing television is to make a show that is essentially just a really long movie. This would be something closer to Stranger Things.
Soderbergh doesn’t follow either of these paths. First and foremost, he directs every episode. And in a series that works on almost every level, his direction is the standout feature. The shots are all handhelds. For a show that is both a period piece and about very technical information, that decision provides a lot of dynamism. The shaky camera makes the setting and characters come alive. It heightens the tension and terror of the surgeries. The second big deviation is that while The Knick is incredibly cinematic, it is still television. The storytelling is episodic. It takes its time to explore the characters. It’s centered at one location, The Knick. I thought it was incredibly refreshing to watch a high-level television show that didn’t feel like it was barreling toward an endpoint. In the aftermath of Mad Men and Breaking Bad, it feels like too many shows are focused on their endings at the cost of their individual episodes. In fact, my only complaint with The Knick is with the last episode. It felt like such a deviation because of the attention it pays to setting up the next season. Hopefully, that’ll be a small price for Season 2 staying as brilliant as Season 1.
Grade: A
*Aired 2014
Broad City (Season 5*) – Ilana Glazer, Abbi Jacobson (Comedy Central)
The level of enthusiasm in Broad City is infectious. I hadn’t considered it before this past season, but it might be the best aspect of the entire series. So much of this show is about how the world is stacked against its characters, and by extension, the viewer. Obviously, different levels of privilege come into play depending on who the viewer is. But I would assume that 99.99% of the show’s audience doesn’t feel like the “real world” is an especially good or just place. But instead of constantly griping about it as you could expect, Broad City does the opposite. It leans all the way into positivity, enthusiasm, and affirmation. So much of the fifth season is about Abbi and Ilana’s relationship to New York. And in the face of how the city is pushing them down more than ever, they lean into how incredible of a place it is too. It’s profound. This point really makes me think about the episode earlier in the series in which Jaimé becomes an American citizen. It’s kind of stunning that in the face of all the horrors of this country, the characters of the show decide to have a huge, ultra-American celebration for the occasion. Drama is always seen as more weighty or important than comedy. And a lot of times it can be. Not in Broad City though. The message of the show is about how love and positivity really can make a difference in the world. Every aspect of the show seems to embody that. As a result, the show is so great precisely because of its relentless positivity.
Grade: A
*Aired 2018
Vice Principals (Seasons 1 + 2*) – Danny McBride, David Gordon Green, Jody Hill (HBO)
The setup and premise of Vice Principals is the best thing about it. Two deeply problematic high school vice principals ruthlessly compete to become principal. It’s great! That these two characters are portrayed by Danny McBride and Walton Goggins is even better. The mileage you get from exploring that dynamic probably varies. I find Danny McBride’s humor to be quite funny but part of me has always appreciated it more than truly loved it. I thought Eastbound and Down was fun, but not necessarily my speed. This show comes a little bit closer. The best parts, to me, were the most outlandish. I loved seeing the show push its characters as far as they could go. I thought Jen was wonderfully insane. The end of both seasons of the show were real highlights. I found the dramatic elements less compelling. Luckily, there’s not a lot of them. I’m excited to see Righteous Gemstones. I think with the right balance, McBride, Gordon Green, and Hill could create something great.
Grade: B
*Aired 2016 + 2017
Mindhunter (Season 2) – Joe Penhall (Netflix)
Back in July, I tried to determine my favorite show of the year and was shocked by how many sure #1s I had: Fleabag, I Think You Should Leave, Trigger Warning. I finally landed on Chernobyl, a complete masterpiece and perhaps the best show of the past few years. Even without Atlanta, 2019 has been a stacked year of TV. One month later and I already have a new #1. Mindhunter is not just the best show of the year, it’s one of my favorite seasons of television ever.
Admittedly, I was a huge fan of Season 1. I loved the cast. Not just the uncanny portrayals of the serial killers, but especially the two leads: Jonathan Groff as Holden Ford and Holt McCallany as Bill Tench. I found the real strength of the show to be its approach to the material. While the show centered on serial killers and true crime, its focus remained on the toll this work does to its two detectives. Another distinguishing factor: the series didn’t show any of the crimes. It focused instead on cases that had already been solved. The tension lied not in catching a killer, but in the methodical work the agents were doing in establishing their field of research.
There were valid criticisms of Season 1. I am not well-versed in the lore of serial killers so most of the cases covered were new to me. I can understand, though, if Season 1 felt a bit exploitative or a re-tread for those well-versed in true crime. Moreover, I did find some aspects of the show to be a bit one dimensional. Ford’s girlfriend, for example, really only existed to highlight Ford’s own sexual awakening in the midst of his work. She did not really stand as a character on her own.
Ford himself, and specifically Groff’s performance, were divisive. His portrayal is akin to something like Thomas Middleditch’s performance in Silicon Valley. He’s a seemingly naive, morally dubious, stupid-smart, genius. For what it’s worth, Groff’s performance worked for me. I found Ford to be rigid and unlikable, but that’s how I read the show. To some, the character just seemed awkward.
Even as someone with no qualms with Season 1, Season 2 is still an improvement on almost every level. It’s a remarkable feat. There are two storytelling decisions in particular that stand out to me. The first is intertwined with Groff’s performance. It’s the show’s decision to move the focus away from Ford. As I just mentioned, Groff’s performance in Season 1 really only worked if you thought he was meant to be unlikable. But this reading was a but ambiguous. In Season 2, it’s obvious. Ford is almost fully a heel. Despite his genius, he’s oblivious and insensitive. Even his intentions are unclear. His personal and professional ambitions trump many of his moral leanings. And while the show highlights this side of Ford, it also moves much of the story away from him.
In any other show, Bill Tench and Wendy Carr would exist solely as compliments to Ford. In this season, they are the focus. In fact, Ford doesn’t even have a personal life in Season 2. Instead, Tench and Carr are the ones with deep and fully explored personal lives. And these stories don’t just serve to give extra life to the characters. They are deeply and complexly intertwined with every aspect of the show. Wendy, for instance, is struggling to re-establish her sexual identity and autonomy. She was an openly gay woman in Boston but has remained closeted in Virginia. This bleeds into her professional life in which she struggles to assert control. At the end of the season she’s told by her bosses to focus on her limited task in the BSU. Is it a punishment for not sleeping with a superior, for her allusions to her sexuality in interviews, because she’s a woman? Or is it not a punishment at all? The show is unclear. What is clear, is how the personal and professional are interwoven in this world.
Likewise, in any other show, Tench’s storyline would feel too big and too disruptive. His son participates in the killing and crucifixion of a young boy. Seriously! But instead of disrupting the show, it settles into it and strengthens its themes. Like Wendy, Tench’s home life seeps into his work. Late in the season, a multi-episode storyline comes together in which Tench has to build a cross. As he does this, we see him look down at the sight his son must have witnessed. We realize that even he is unable to extract himself from the constant horrors that this show depicts. Crucially, he has to ask himself if his son is on the same path as the criminals he interviews. Writing it all out, this sounds like it would be overdone or hokey. Yet, the show commits to it so fully that it works. It’s seamless.
The scariest moment I’ve ever had watching a film comes from David Fincher in Zodiac. As Jake Gyllenhaal tracks down leads in his case, he arrives at the home of a former movie theater owner. We know that his suspect may have done the artwork for the posters at the theater. When Gyllenhaal asks about this work, the owner responds that the posters are in the basement. A chilling cue to earlier in the film in which we learned that the Zodiac would be one of the few people in San Francisco to have a basement. In the last episodes of Season 2, I had 3 moments that sent that same chill up my spine.
The first is when team finally catches Wayne Williams. I don’t know if I can even describe what I found so chilling about it. Just something about finding a real person to fill in for the almost mythical killer they’ve been trying to find. The second was as an Atlanta agent goes to secretly put a tracker on Williams’ car and the lights in Williams’ house come on. It’s not a particularly unique scene, but this show is so flawless in executing suspense, it’s breathtaking. The final, and most chilling, moment occurs in the final scene of the season. We get one more vignette of the BTK killer with his mask. It’s seeing a monster come to life. It’s truly one of the most chilling pieces of filmmaking I’ve ever watched. It’s these moments that make Mindhunter so special.
Succession (Season 1* & Season 2) – Jesse Armstrong (HBO)
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before, but this is the best show on television. It is so funny and confident. It honestly doesn’t even feel like television. Which is even more impressive because it operates entirely like a “regular” show. It’s not like this is a prestige film or novel that just happens to air on HBO. It plays, almost strictly, by the rules of TV and somehow transcends it. Because the show is so well done, the seams don’t even show even when they’re in plain sight. When I watch Succession, more than anything, I feel totally unprepared for what will happen next. Toward the end of Season 2, I started to feel like I had a grasp on what might occur. Still, this show is impossible to predict. It delights totally in the chaos of not knowing what will happen. You are not even sure when each episode will pick up. Even when an episode airs, it’s hard to determine how much time has passed since the last one. Though the show is documenting the contention of one family to take hold of a media empire, it is rooted in their personal struggles. Instead of focusing on the mechanical aspects of how a media takeover would happen, it focuses on the family’s personal turmoil. It’s a great example of a show knowing its world intimately, but not over-explaining it. If Kendall needs to land a deal, for instance, we watch him because we know what the deal will mean for him. Not what it means for the technical plot mechanics of the show. This, in large part, is how Season 2 was able to end so masterfully. We had watched Kendall fall apart. So when he’s at the bottom, and his father is asking him to sacrifice himself, we believe he will. It makes it that much more exciting and euphoric that he chooses to fight against his dad once more. He has all the cards to play in his hand. And we’ve seen them! We just didn’t think he had the emotional capacity to do it.
Grade: A
*Aired 2018
The Righteous Gemstones – Danny McBride, David Gordon Green, Jody Hill (HBO)
As I alluded to when writing about Vice Principals, there’s something about McBride’s humor that has never fully clicked with me. I certainly admire it. I think him, Gordon Green, and Hill all have really good tendencies as filmmakers. As much as anything, I think their output has been as weird as anything over the past decade. Which is an impressive and important feat. Television, and comedy in general, has grown more homogenous in general. So when I watched Eastbound and Down or Vice Principals, it was often more for shock value than strictly the comedy. I wanted to see how decrepit McBride was willing to go with these characters. They were never the types of shows that had me cackling the whole time. The first half of Righteous Gemstones starts out this way. It is elaborate. The filmmaking has gone to another level. The scope of the show is enormous. I loved the performances and concept. Still, something was missing. It just didn’t feel like a truly hilarious show. Luckily, I found the second half of the show to be so much funnier. Though I don’t even know if its comedy actually gets better. I suspect that I may have just calibrated to it. But the show is able to pack some really, really funny moments in its last few episodes. Moreover, this show gets to be as filthy and outlandish as McBride has ever been. There is so much gross physical comedy in this show. I don’t think I’ve seen a show with as much male nudity in it. The best and grossest parts, however, all belong to Edi Patterson. She is truly incredible. She delivers such disgusting lines. Her performance is absolutely the funniest part of the show.
Grade: B / B+
Watchmen – Damon Lindelof (HBO)
Holy shit. I have never seen a season of TV like this. It was so wild, so weird, and so fully immersive. I think the craziest part of the experience was just how untethered I felt as a viewer. I obviously can’t speak to the experience of book readers, but I imagine it’s similar. As far as I can tell, you really have no idea what the show is about until the big reveal at the end of episode seven. To say Lindelof stuck the landing would be an understatement. In one (albeit long) episode, all of our threads come together and are neatly tied up. It was powerful and satisfying and deeply moving. It seamlessly explained why all of our characters had been there. It’s just mind-bogglingly great. I’ve said all of this without even getting to the real achievement of the show. Lindelof was able to use the framework of existing IP to tell a deeply affecting story about race in America. It is the type of story that I’m sure Marvel wants to tell with Captain Marvel or Black Panther. But they would never make anything as brave or risk-taking as this. Even in what I felt was a flawless season of TV, two episodes stand out in particular. “This Extraordinary Being” and “A God Walks into Abar” are towering storytelling achievements. Easily two of my favorite hours of television ever.
Grade: A+
Unbelievable – Susannah Grant, Ayelet Waldman, Michael Chabon (Netflix)
Gioia and I devoured this show. I think we watched it in three days. And while that pace is definitely worked into the show’s design, it is also fairly surprising. This show is heavy. I think it’s so harrowing that you feel you have to watch it fast. In fact, I would be shocked if anybody watched the first episode and took a break there. It ends on such a brutal moment. It feels like you have to decide to quit or push through. And while I am explaining that the show is often hard to watch, I should note that I loved it. I thought it was extremely thoughtful, extraordinarily well done, and incredibly powerful. I was blown away by the performances. I had seen most of the cast before, but never in roles like this. Merrit Weaver and Kaitlyn Dever, in particular, are amazing. I really hope they get rewarded for their work. Above all, the thing I admired about this show is that it at once feels like a compliment to and a commentary on true crime. What I mean is that this show works in large part because it has all the hallmarks of a true-crime story. There’s the detectives, the casework, the suspects, etc. It’s really exciting. You get fired up for every lead. Yet, this show is also hyper-aware of how true crime usually minimizes the victim. Mindhunter, for instance, focuses very little on the victims’ experience. Instead, it looks at the toll this work takes on the detectives and how they ultimately succeed. Moreover, Mindhunter, by design, specifically hones in on the psychological profile of the criminal. This show doesn’t do that. Its entire first episode is painfully constructed on the victim’s experience. It’s not something I’d ever seen before, especially on TV. You go meticulously through every statement, every piece of evidence, the hospital exam. It’s deeply upsetting. One thing I hate in most films or television is when a character quotes the title. This may be the first instance in which I loved it. At the end of the series, upon gathering every piece of evidence, Merrit Weaver says it was “unbelievable.” That moment felt like such a repurposing and reclamation of the title. And that’s what this show felt like to me. This successful repurposing of a really popular genre.
Grade: A
You (Season 2)-Greg Berlanti & Sera Gamble (Netflix)
Wow. What a show. I started watching with Gioia. I hadn’t even seen Season 1 (though I’m watching now). In general, I reject the premise of a guilty pleasure. I feel like things are either good or bad. This show…complicates that idea. The plot and dialogue are often objectively nonsensical. In the last few episodes alone there is just so much exposition. It’s crazy. Characters operate in no real logical sense. They’re motivated by what would be the craziest thing to happen in the show. But! This is a show after all. So if you can buy in, it’s hard to argue that the show isn’t compelling. Its premise and plot are so addictive. It feels like each episode has an entire series worth of plot in it. What really works is that the show and the actors have just enough fun that it never feels like a slog. They really understand what show this is and that makes it all the better. I honestly don’t think I can assess this with a grade. What am I even grading it on? It’d be like writing a food review about Cheetos. What would you say? Artificial and amazing?
Grade: ???
The Mandalorian – Jon Favreau (Disney +)
This is a show that just hasn’t clicked for me. First, I love Baby Yoda. It is pretty much the reason I’ve pushed through the season. Second, I like Star Wars. I really like the idea of a television series set in this world. My issue with the show, I think, is how much of it seems dependent on that connection. So much of the show’s appeal seems to be that it is tied to Star Wars. This seems to matter even more than the details of the show itself. I did think the last two episodes were by far the best of the series. I’m guessing that I will be on board for the next season. Until then…
Grade: B-
Incomplete:
Lodge 49 (Season 1* & Season 2) – Jim Gavin (AMC)
Gioia and I watched the first season together. There’s so much I like and really admire about the show. I think Wyatt Russell and Sonya Cassidy are tremendous. I obviously love the allusions and homage to Pynchon. Gioia said the thing she really appreciates in the show is that it’s about the actual magic that exists in the world. It really does have this sense of wonder about it. Of course, the show hints at there being actual magic and alchemy in the universe, but it’s really there to underline how strange the actual universe is already. One of the themes in the first season is the real grief the main characters feel for their father. I’ve never seen loss and grief explored in this way. To tie it into the mysticism and uncertainty that exists is a really powerful approach. Now, despite all of this praise, I obviously quit. As much as I love the show on paper, I just found it to be slow. The episodes are long and aside from Sean and Liz’s characters, I couldn’t latch on. I have heard the second season gets much better. I feel bad that it got canceled. Maybe next year, I’ll finish it.
*Aired 2018
It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia (Season 14) – Rob McElhenney
I don’t have a whole lot to say honestly. Sunny is a true classic. We started the season, thought the episodes were all pretty decent, but haven’t gone back yet. We will.
4th: Rocketman – Dexter Fletcher (2019)
When I saw Bohemian Rhapsody, I expected it to be a train wreck and it was pretty bad. But, it was also better than I had expected. I ended up enjoying it more than I thought. Unfortunately, I had a bit of the opposite problem with Rocketman. All I had heard was how incredible the movie was. And there are some great parts for sure. The campiness, the performances, and the visuals are all lovely. The story, I would say, is about as bad as Bohemian Rhapsody. It’s just (thankfully) not censored.
Grade: C+
8th: LOTR: The Fellowship of the Ring – Peter Jackson (2001)
Watched at home with Gioia. It is unbelievably good. I truly can’t believe how incredible this movie is. The adaptation of the story itself feels like a miracle. The film is three hours long and never drags. Each character is introduced and portrayed lovingly but with no excess. It struck me how each character only says the most important thing they could possibly say. For instance, Gandalf is barely introduced before he’s warning Frodo about the ring. Legolas and Gimli have surprisingly minor parts, yet it feels like you know them completely. Even Boromir has so much depth as a character. Jackson is able to convey both his weaknesses for the ring as well as his family’s honor in just a few lines. Aside from all of that, the movie looks incredible. I was really stunned by how good it is. A true masterpiece.
Grade: A+
9th: LOTR: The Two Towers – Peter Jackson (2002)
This was my favorite of the trilogy when I was a kid. And to be clear, it completely holds up. Surprisingly, I now think it’s the least brilliant of the three films. The battle of Helm’s Deep is amazing. It’s still clearly a feat of filmmaking. Thrones referenced it in their ambitions for the final season. Unfortunately, the first two hours are a little slower. I’m not sure there’s any way to get around that. The film has to set up all of Rohan as well as the stakes for the battle. Merry and Pippen literally have to wait on the Ents to make up their mind. And Frodo and Sam are just in the middle of their journey. It works perfectly for the overall story, but it’s just a little slower than the other films.
Grade: A-
10th: LOTR: The Return of the King – Peter Jackson (2003)
It is incredible how perfect this series is. When the movies were coming out I had no appreciation for how hard it would be to finish this story. It’s probably a testament to how good the movies were that I wouldn’t even think about it. It’s unbelievable how well this film is able to conclude the series. Every sequence is impeccably timed. Jackson is cutting between three separate stories and manipulating their stakes to elevate the others. The fact that Eowyn has such a beautiful arc is amazing. She’s like the fourteenth most important character in the story, and by the end, you care for her so much. I have to imagine Jackson knew he was on a roll. I can’t imagine why else he would have the confidence to have like four endings to the movie. And you know what? It’s a bit long, but it works.
Grade: A
10th: Stranger than Fiction – Marc Forster (2006)
Watched at home with Gioia. I liked it! The premise took me a second to warm up to, but it totally works. I think the most important part, is they never really try to explain it or the ramifications beyond Emma Thompson and Will Ferrell’s characters. Dustin Hoffman is so funny in this movie. It’s really charming. I wish Will Ferrell was a little less creepy. It’s hard for me to believe that Maggie Gyllenhaal would put up with all of his creeping. Other than that, I think everything works, especially the end.
Grade: B
11th: Rolling Thunder Revue: A Bob Dylan Story by Martin Scorcese – Martin Scorsese (2019)
What can I say? This movie is made for about 1% of the population and I’m one of them. It’s amazing. Amazing! The performances are some of the best I’ve ever heard. And everything else is just a trip. I can understand being upset by a lot of it being fake, but I think it makes it even better.
Grade: A-
18th: The Dead Don’t Die – Jim Jarmusch (2019)
Watched at the Landmark with Gioia. It’s a weird one. I think I like the movie in concept much more than execution. For such a silly movie, I’ve found myself thinking about it far more than I thought. Which speaks to its substance for sure. I find myself wishing some of it were just a tad more polished. The dryness of it is charming in parts but also drags on in others.
Grade: C+
21st: Picnic at Hanging Rock – Peter Wier (1975)
Watched at home at night. It is just so visually arresting. The music is incredible. It’s the type of film I’d love to see in theaters. I think the operatic score would be so overwhelming in that setting. In terms of story, it was a bit of a slow burn. I could have been paying closer attention. Everything is so ambivalent and shrouded in mystery. I did love that it concludes without answers. Really reminded me of Terrance Malick or David Lynch.
Grade: B+
21st: The Virgin Suicides – Sofia Coppola (1999)
A double feature! It’s such a good pairing. This movie oddly is so much easier to watch. It’s funny, it has a hit soundtrack. The story moves along so suspensefully. Yet, it’s incredibly disturbing. I was blown away that someone could pull off this type of movie. On the surface, you’d think it has to be insensitive. But it captures the feeling and sentiment of these girls so accurately. Even if the movie is completely surreal.
Grade: B+
30th: Thunder Road – Jim Cummings (2018)
Watched at home. It’s really hard to watch. It takes the original premise of the short and doubles down on the darkness. Everything hinted at in the short is taken to its furthest, saddest extreme here. Normally, I think something like this would be too much for me. A little too Shakespearean. But this movie works. Cummings is a master at narrative hints and plants and payoffs. There are so many small details that come to fruition in the final thirty minutes. It really makes the movie for me.
Grade: B / B+ Thunder Road- Jim Cummings (2018)
5th: Widows – Steve McQueen (2018)
Watched on my flight from Boston to Chicago. I dug it! The best part of the film is by far the ensemble. It’s actually kind of wild to think about. Brian Tyree Henry and Collin Ferrell carry the B-story. Daniel Kaluuya is the B-part of the B story. I also loved the setting of Chicago. Always cool to see your neighborhood in a movie. I do not think the script completely makes sense. It’s one of those where at the end it’s just twist after twist after twist.
Grade: B / B+
25th: Lady Bird – Greta Gerwig (2017)
Watched at home with Gioia. It’s a near perfect movie. I’m constantly amazed at how much about this family Gerwig manages to capture. There are so many details of Lady Bird’s life that in another movie would be forced or telegraphed. Here they feel like natural details that elevate the story. The ending is still so emotional. Really in contention for my favorite movie of the decade.
Grade: A
25th: Saved! – Brian Dannelly (2004)
A Catholic movie double feature. This movie is outrageous. I’m not sure if the premise/concept of it really holds up for me. Still, it’s a fun time.
Grade: C
11. Castle in the Sky (1986)
9. Ponyo (2008)
6. Princess Mononoke (2000)
5. Howl’s Moving Castle (2004)
4. Porco Rosso (1992)
3. My Neighbor Totoro (1988)
2. Spirited Away (2001)
1. Kiki’s Delivery Service (1989)
Sam Writes Shit 
