best film: Lost in Translation from Sofia Coppola
With Kill Bill married to the second half of the film, which came out in 2004, it is pretty easy to declare Lost in Translation the best singular film of 2003. The only other film, or part of a film, that is close, is the totality of Peter Jackson’s 10+ hour The Lord of the Rings but not only is it broken out over three years (2001-2003), but 2003 is the weakest entry of the three. Coppola’s work in Lost in Translation is her most perfectly realized – a meditation on celebrity and isolation.
Lost in Translation has a climax fit for annals cinema history with the unheard whisper- and two superb lead performances from Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson.
most underrated: Both Café Lumiere and Mystic River are omitted by the TSPDT consensus list on their most recent top 1000 so that is a good place to start as far as the most underrated film of 2003 goes. Hsiao-Hsien Hou’s film is slightly superior so would be the ultimate choice here for this category in 2003. Mystic River is Eastwood’s first film in his new visual mode and the start of a renaissance in filmmaking from 2003-08 (at age 73 in 2003) that is already getting unduly forgotten and underappreciated. Eastwood made six archiveable films during this stretch of six years and Mystic River is right there with Million Dollar Baby as the best). The overhead shot of Sean Penn, the silent cues on the street during the parade, and then the dialogue and mirror scene between Laura Linney and Penn at the film’s finale are all reasons it warrants a seat in the top 500…let alone top 1000.
Eastwood makes a masterful choice to elevate the camera for a crucial scene in Mystic River
Eastwood’s painting here in Mystic River will pair perfectly with a similar image that will show up on the 2004 page from Million Dollar Baby– pieces in a collection
- Café Lumiere is a staggering achievement of mise-en-scene that serves both as a devoted homage to Ozu and as a major triumph for Hsiao-Hsien Hou.
beautiful compositions that could be from Ozu’s later period– Late Afternoon, The End of Summer
- Before the film really starts there’s a dedication to Ozu’s centenarian 100 year old celebration
- Apparently, the film was conceived as an anthology film with three parts- but HHH is the only auteur that remained as the project idea progressed — Hsiao-Hsien Hou is one of the artform’s greatest masters of mise-en-scene this side of Ozu so the project and idea seems like a perfect marriage. Though, at the time in the 1980s he claimed he had never seen an Ozu film, HHH’s phenomenal A Time to Live and a Time to Die also feels like a work (and artist) inspired by Ozu.
- Shot in Ozu’s Japan (all of HHH’s other work is in Taiwan or China or both), opens and closes with long pillow shots of trains intersecting
- the second shot is a stunner as well- a fully-engaged and designed mise-en-scene, depth of field brilliance, laundry in the background, fan in the foreground (happens often in Café Lumiere), a door ajar creating a frame within a frame. Long take. One scene and one take—then we get the titles—incredible work
- After that we get another set mise-en-scene long take, medium distance, no camera movement or edits. There’s a row of books at the bookstore forcing your eyes towards the characters. Small talk and music (they are literally playing a cd) with a pet dog in the background. One take again.
- Trains again and again in transitions—it’s not quite Ozu’s montage pillow shot poetics—but still
- The mise-en-scene 17 minutes in is a dazzler— three doors in the frame—another one 28 minutes in with the father sitting silently with drinks in the foreground
- one of the many standout mise-en-scene set-ups — 8 minutes in with the father sitting silently with drinks in the foreground
- The two lovers going by each other in passing trains
- An Ozu-like family drama with generational issues and disconnect (I love the father who just sits and drinks and never says a word)
- A sublime (and formally sound) final image on the canal with overlapping trains
most overrated: It is a simple choice in 2003- the most overrated film of the year is Lars von Trier’s Dogville. Dogville is near the masterpiece level on the TSPDT consensus list (#348) which makes it the #1 fiction film of the year. The film features an admirable dedication to an aesthetic- there is a certain boldness in the choices von Trier makes (even if that choice is to be ugly and flat)- but there is a substantial gulf between the artistic merits of Dogville and von trier’s Breaking the Waves, Dancer in the Dark, and Melancholia.
gems I want to spotlight: I am going to throw out four gems for 2003- all slide off the top 10 of the year. The Triplets of Belleville is animation like you’ve never seen before- worth seeking out. American Splendor is a film I come back to often – the story of curmudgeon cartoonist Harvey Pekar played by Paul Giamatti. I watch Bad Santa every year during the holidays and Matrix Reloaded is a film that deserves a better reputation than it has- more on that film and Bad Santa here.
The Matrix Reloaded:
- There are two films here really broken up by about the first hour of the movie vs. the second hour– one is an uninteresting slog (the first half), the other is spectacular.
- Starts with the emerald-infused Warners logo— the color scheme production design dedication even in the logo- love it!
- The schlocky “oh—upgrades” sequel language that often happens in bad comedies or action sequels
- It isn’t the rip-roaring creativity-infused narrative juggernaut the first film is—this sprawls out, more characters, building out the universe—fatty—mostly not good additions
- Gratuitous scenes like the orgy dance, the fighting of the 1000 Agent Smith Hugo Weavings’. It’s showing off some size and special effects but it doesn’t impress
- The opening with the 2-minute flashback of Trinity (which is a foreshadowed dream from Reeve’s Neo) is strong, as is the half-circle shot during love-making, there’s a triple ellipsis edit move here by the Wachowskis that is really nice as they move that set back farther and farther each time—but by and large the first hour is forgettable
The artistic aspects of the film start with the Merovingian scenes 63 minutes in (I’m pretty convinced it is unarchiveable up until now)- green flooding that restaurant—a dogmatic dedication to color in the design. Here- frankly this is a composition for the ages- easily one of the best of 2003 if not beyond.
- This sets the tone for the chateau action set piece (at 70 minutes) sequence- the green tapestry and weapons on the wall.
- And then leads to the jaw-on-the-floor phenomenal freeway scene at 85 minutes—these combine to make like a green-coated Zhang Yimou film (if the 1999 original is like Star Wars in many ways, this pivots and is like Zhang Yimou’s 2002 film Hero or House of Flying Daggers in 2004) and in a short film format the freeway scene really predicts Mad Max: Fury Road
- Fishburne is commanding once again—a speechmaker- “isn’t that worth dying for?”
- The Wachowskis are as interested in background as they are in the foreground in this half of the movie which was simply not the case in the first sixty minutes
- The green doors in the white hall sequence, the skyline with green lights when Neo
- the skyline with green lights when Neo looks out — strong
- The meeting with the architect is a stunner as well. Strong world-building in the mise-en-scene. It’s 2001’s ending encounter in the bedroom meets The Man Who Fell to Earth
- Like the first film Rage Against the Machine smacks you in the face before you hit the end credits- perfect
- I love Ebert- what a writer– but he has 1000 words on the 1999 film original and 1000 words on this and never uses the word “green”. Does he not notice the color design? Or isn’t important to him? Has to be one, right?
- tough to evaluate with the flat first half and the remarkable second half
Bad Santa
- Though not a formal consistency (the opening is just a Billy Bob setting the scene and the ending is a letter to Thurman) Billy Bob’s sardonic voice over is so well written and performed- harkens to his work in 2001 in the Coen brother’s The Man Who Wasn’t There and film noir
- The screenplay (and ensuring laughs) is/are layered. I laugh at different parts every time.
absolutely gorgeous cinematic painting of Billy Bob throwing up in the snow in the alley just before (and as) the “Bad Santa” title comes in in the beginning of the firm-
- Writing brilliance a plenty “are you off your meds?” and “queer as a $10 bill”- even the Bob Chipeska name for the John Ritter character is inspired- no detailed spared here in top notch script
- Repetition in the dialogue- again something used by the Coens- “sandwiches”
- I adore the “I beat some kids up today” speech- wonderful writing
trends and notables:
- 2003 drops off a bit from the recent run of splendid years to start the decade/century
- 2003 marks the end of The Lord of the Rings trilogy—it also marks the start of Kill Bill (volume two to come in 2004). – two major events for cinephiles for sure.
Kill Bill starts with the sublime black and white opening to Nancy Sinatra’s “Bang Bang” with David Carradine’s baritone soon following ringing in with “Do you find me sadistic?” Here, perhaps the most beautiful shot in the film (and there are so many) could be the view of the backyard garden with the snow as Uma Thurman opens the shoji door in the restaurant. It is a Leone moment with again the sound design focusing on that water sprout into the pond.
It is Tarantino so there are influences galore—too many to count but one to note is Lady Snowblood (1973)
through 2003- Tarantino has made four films- and all four land on the top 10 films of the year– including Kill Bill of course in 2003.
- The Coen brothers have had such a storied career (both before and after 2003)- so I find it noteworthy to mention this brief lull- Intolerable Cruelty does land in the archives – but it may be the 40th best film of the year (not the norm for them). The next year, they’ll release The Ladykillers (2004) and hit their low (and so far only unarchiveable film).
- 2003 is a big year for the Korean New Wave- Bong Joon Ho’s’ Memories of Murder and Park Chan-wook’s Oldboy land in the top 10 of the year. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring from Kim Ki-duk would be the very next film (so #11) if I expanded the top 10 to included more films.
Park Chan-wook impresses in back to back years in 2002 and 2003 (Oldboy here) with the first two legs of The Vengeance trilogy
staging in Bong’s Memories of Murder– an artistic triumph that would be worthy of Kurosawa
Bong’s Memories of Murder leads the way for the most impressive single year in Korean cinema history to date in 2003
the enthralling narrative may keep you from appreciating Bong’s artistry upon first blush- it is a film that rewards/demands repeat viewings
- My ranking below for The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King has to do with some of my problems with that film specifically. I think the first, Fellowship in 2001, is the strongest of the three however, like Kill Bill, I evaluate and rate this film as one film (a 10+ hour film in this case) and not three separate film. So the top 10, which takes up three separate years, does not really equate-I am trying to doing my best. This is a 10-hour masterpiece that warrants a spot amongst the very greatest of films from the 00s decade. Jackson’s world has been so beautifully built. The narrative is nearly peerless, the establishing shots astonish.
The Return of the King and Two Towers with the focus on the battles may not luxuriate in the cinematic paintings as much as Fellowship (as Jackson introduces us to the world)—but one of the best shots in the entire running time is a shot of staggered faces blocking each other- foreground right Viggo, and, also in profile, is Orlando Bloom’s Legolas next to him—at night
- Finding Nemo from Pixar is the box office champ for 2003- Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl would be next.
- As mentioned above in the underrated, 2003 marks the sort of Eastwood renaissance with Mystic River. His body of work from this point forward (he’s 73) would be superior to many great auteurs’ entire careers.
- Sofia Coppola and Alejandro González Iñárritu prove their promising debuts were just the start- they both leave 2003 two for two making top 10 of the year films
Iñárritu’s 21 Grams- the third time in four years that the top 10 of the year has featured a film from the Nuevo Cine Mexicano
- Unfortunately, Saraband would be the last archiveable film for the masterful Ingmar Bergman. The Dreamers would be the final one for Bernardo Bertolucci.
- For firsts, it is an undeniably light year, but it is great to have Michelle Williams in the archives for the first time. It is clear from the very beginning (here with The Station Agent) that she is an unbelievably talented actor. Keira Knightley (only 18) starts her promising career with Pirates of the Caribbean.
best performance male: Bill Murray gives the best performance of the year in Lost in Translation. It is tough to call this his career-defining work because he is so damn good in Groundhog’s Day, and you have the work with Wes Anderson, but there is no single performance that surpasses Murray’s work here. It would be easy to call Murray the best performer of the year if it was not for Sean Penn standing on his head in two of the best eight films of the year (Mystic River and 21 Grams). Their accomplishment here in 2003 is just about equal. Behind them, Min-sik Choi for his work in Oldboy, Russell Crowe for his work in Master and Commander and, finally, Viggo Mortensen for his collective work in the LOTR trilogy, all deserve mentions. There is also room enough for Kang-ho Song in Memories of Murder as well.
best performance female: Quality over quantity is the name of the game for this category in 2003. Scarlett Johansson stands at the top (again, especially when Uma gets divided over 2003 and 2004 in Kill Bill). Has there ever been a more mature performance from someone under 20 years of age than Johansson’s work here? Murray’s performance is the louder one- but Scarlett is the center of the film and she gives a wonderful, internalized performance- a performance that would stand up with the performances in Antonioni’s films in the early 1960s. Uma Thurman’s achievement in Tarantino’s 2003/2004 masterpiece needs to be recognized of course. It is Uma, Sigourney Weaver in Aliens and Charlize Theron in Fury Road when talking about all-time great performances by women in action films- and these three stand toe to toe with any male vying for that honor. Uma’s performance showcases moments of pain (at points if feels like we’re in a von Trier misogyny/torture/abuse situation) —along with moments of action star cool and charm. Naomi Watts proves that Mulholland Drive in 2001 was no fluke here with her second mention here in three years with her work in 21 Grams.
top 10
- Lost in Translation
- Kill Bill: Vol. 1
- Café Lumiere
- Mystic River
- Elephant
- Memories of Murder
- The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
- 21 Grams
- Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
- Oldboy
there is some competition- but 2003’s Elephant remains the high water mark for Gus Van Sant
a grand example of style and form- the ever-present tracking shots from behind his characters. Gerry (2002) and Last Days (2005) make up Van Sant’s Death Trilogy
from Peter Weir’s Master and Commander– breathtaking JMW-Turner-like cinematic paintings
a shot worthy of Vermeer from Girl with a Pearl Earring
Archives, Directors, and Grades
| 21 Grams – Iñárritu | HR/MS |
| All the Real Girls- Gordon Green | R |
| American Splendor- Berman, Pulcini | R/HR |
| Angels in America- M. Nichols | R |
| Bad Santa– Zwigoff | R |
| Best of Youth – Giordana | R |
| Café Lumiere – Hsiao-Hsien Hou | MS/MP |
| Coffee and Cigarettes – Jarmusch | R |
| Cold Mountain- Minghella | R |
| Crimson Gold- Panahi | HR |
| Dogville- von Trier | R |
| Elephant- Van Sant | MS |
| Finding Nemo- Unkrich, Stanton | R/HR |
| Girl With a Pearl Earring- Webber | R |
| Goodbye, Dragon Inn– Ming-liang Tsai | HR |
| House of Sand and Fog- Perelman | R |
| Intolerable Cruelty- Coen | R |
| Kill Bill – Tarantino | MP |
| Lost in Translation- S. Coppola | MP |
| Maria Full of Grace – Marston | R |
| Master and Commander: Far Side of the World- Weir | HR/MS |
| Matchstick Men – R. Scott | R |
| Memories of Murder- Bong | MS |
| Monster- Jenkins | R |
| Mystic River- Eastwood | MS/MP |
| Old Boy- Chan-wook Park | HR/MS |
| Owning Mahowny -Kwietniowski | R |
| Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl- Verbinski | R |
| Saraband- Bergman | R |
| School of Rock- Linklater | R |
| Seabiscuit- Ross | R |
| Shattered Glass – B. Ray | R |
| Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter…and Spring- Kim Ki-duk | HR |
| The Barbarian Invasions – Arcand | |
| The Cooler- W. Kramer | R |
| The Dreamers- Bertolucci | R |
| The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King– Jackson | MP |
| The Matrix Reloaded – Wachowski | HR |
| The Return- Zvyagintsev | HR |
| The Secret Lives of Dentists- Rudolph | R |
| The Station Agent-McCarthy | HR |
| The Triplets of Bellville – Chomet | R |
| Thirteen- Hardwicke | R |
| Time of the Wolf- Haneke | R |
| Tokyo Godfathers- Kon | R |
*MP is Masterpiece- top 1-3 quality of the year film
MS is Must-See- top 5-6 quality of the year film
HR is Highly Recommend- top 10 quality of the year film
R is Recommend- outside the top 10 of the year quality film but still in the archives
Finding Nemo is a capital M masterpiece. For me, masterpieces are top 1000 (Nemo is just out, though I have no doubt it will get into the top 1000 eventually). However this isn’t just a masterpiece, it’s a capital M masterpiece for me. rewatching the movie took it from an mp to an Mp for me. The character development (especially Marlin’s growth) is soooo well done. The use of fade out editing is brilliantly done too. The voice acting is superb. The foreshadowing/subtle hints are brilliant. The action sequences are really good and most importantly, the animation is GORGEOUS and extremely detailed. It’s informative, emotional, funny, entertaining and, overall a genius piece of filmmaking.
Well you have 4 tiers I have 6. A Capital M masterpiece is higher than a standard masterpiece for me. Thank about the 100000s of movies that must have been released since 1920. Surely about 1000 or so are really good and about 250-500 are capital M masterpiece level.
All I was trying to say is that Nemo is an incredible film (Stanton’s best. Even better than Walle) I have made my arguments above. Do you agree?
Ok I guess I was wrong. A masterpiece by definition is something that displays great artistic achievement (which is a lot of movies) A masterpiece for me is like a MS/HR for you but, what I call a capital M masterpiece is what you consider to be a regular masterpiece. I guess I will start using MS/HR instead. Sorry for the confusion. My bad.
Anyways my point was that Finding Nemo is an excellent movie. Definitely a little higher than an R/HR like you have it.
Now that I think about it, you are right. 1000 is too many to call masterpieces. For me now I think it’s probably around 300-500 or so.
By the way, what did you think of Oldboy? I think it’s quite vulgar and violent, but if you can look past the violence it’s actually a very well done movie. I have it as a 3rd-(close to 2nd) tier movie (an HR in your ranking system).
I mean, I am with the group of those who greatly admire Dogville, and I can safely say I agree with the TSPDT consensus. I just think it is some of cinema’s finest work, definitely top 500. So I guess I’d have it at least at the number 3 slot here, right behind Lost in Translation and Kill Bill.
That said, I don’t have any issues with the ranking – I rarely do on your blog. I completely agree with the movies you’ve picked, perhaps with the sole exception of Mystic River. Don’t get me wrong, it is a top 10 film, but not my top 3 of the year. I would have it near the tail end of the list. I always appreciate Eastwood films, I just don’t usually find them groundbreaking or am stunned by them (unlike say Dogville) – still it is great work.
I’d also be lying if I didn’t express my admiration for Angels in America. I am not confident that it belongs in the top 10 of the year, but I greatly appreciate it and believe it is a culturally important project with respectful work all around. Not excessively original, but with some top notch writing, acting, directing and a very interesting and well developed premise. Something like the Hours, a year earlier, though the latter is a touch superior.
@Drake – I completely get your point. If we’re talking about beauty and artistry / poetry with regards to the shots and the sequences, Mystic River beats Dogville every time – Dogville is simply lacking both of those things.
You are also dead right about the method – Dogville is entirely unique. Besides the fact that ugliness in Von Trier films is often a stylistic choice, here the decision to make it all look like a play sets Dogville apart from many other films – it sticks with you.
Besides that, it is a triumph of screenplay. That is a characteristic shared with both Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark – it slowly but steadily moves toward a doom like ending, all the while making acidic sociopolitical critique accompanied by brilliant character work. The finale is shocking, but looking back it is also quite inevitable. The film is so layered, I just can’t seem to ignore all the different interpretations one can come up with – immigration, Kidman as Christ (or Antichrist, for that matter), a meditation on capitalism – all those are perfectly valid. I can’t get behind how thought-provoking Dogville is.
Finally, I wanted to point out a detail that a lot of people seem to miss. The lighting is sublime. As we reach the bitter end, the screen is drenched in red and throughout the film we can discern glowing yellows and cold blues. It is not exactly beautiful, but from a technical point of view, all that work must count for something right? Plus, I couldn’t help but mention Nicole Kidman’s performance which is definitely something to behold and as far as I’m concerned her very best, possibly behind Moulin Rouge! – two films which are worlds apart.
@Drake – haha, don’t mention it. It is always interesting to comment on your blog – the content is amazing here.
I rewatched Dogville since a friend of mine claimed it is the best film of the 2000s and it excited me to revisit. I think it’s a masterpiece. The formal approach stands up there with the greatest of the century and the narrative/storytelling is masterful. Those 2 are enough I think but I also discover a lot of visual interest there, the lighting especially and the atmosphere in general make the film sustain a powerful visual style and the shots of the faces framed in the black (or white) atmosphere makes for a stunning mise-en-scene.
@Drake– Yes, I completely get that. It’s not the conventional visual beauty that awe-inspires you. Not the “Tree of Life” or “Roma” type of beauty and certainly the beauty of Dogville isn’t close to those films. But yeah, I think the film for all of the runtime sustains a fantastic atmosphere. It also has to do with the staging of the objects in the frame.
Doesn’t Charlotte Rampling deserve a mention in the best female category for Swimming Pool(2003)?
No Open Range(2003) really?Another powerhouse performance from the great Robert Duvall.
I caught a recent viewing of Mystic River (2003) a film that I’ve seen many times. I can’t think of too many films with more great performances. And while most will pick Sean Penn (who is amazing) I think Tim Robbins gives the best performance, there’s a great scene when Kevin Bacon and Laurence Fishburne’s characters go to interview him for the first time and they walk with him as he walks his son to school. As soon as Tim Robbins walks away Laurence Fishburne asks Kevin Bacon’s character “what happened to him in that car?” Tim Robbins carries aura of sadness and pain from his facial expressions to the way he walks. It’s incredible the way his internalization of his childhood tragedy manifests physically. And yet as bad as you may feel for his character he always portrays a sense of someone capable of doing evil himself. The scene where he tells his wife about what happened to him (the 1st time he told someone about it in 25 years) it’s absolutely devastating. The scenes between Robbins and Sean Penn are some of the best 2 way acting imaginable.
Robbins is truly fantastic in this film but I wouldn’t hesitate for a second to pick Penn as the best performer in it. It doesn’t even look like he’s acting for almost the whole duration of the film; his performance is completely natural. His role is also more complex than Robbins’: he’s an ex-con, a gang leader and a father (as Drake has mentioned about the film) yet he manages to perfectly balance and even combine all three of these roles into one. Certainly one of the finest performances in cinematic history.
@Zane – yeah and most people would agree, Sean Penn’s character is definitely more complex I agree there, what really stands out to me is the control and power he still has as a former gang leader despite the fact that he had been living straight for like close to 20 years yet he still has the impact of a mob boss in his neighborhood while also playing an adoring father, unbelievable performance and your probably right. For me though I just love the performance Robbins gives as SPOILER ALERT – the first time you watch it you don’t really know what his involvement in the crime is up until the end of the film. I remember thinking that I would not have been that surprised if he had indeed been the one who killed Sean Penn’s characters daughter. And the scenes between Robbins and his wife are unbelievable as well, Robbins character despite all his hurt has is basically unable to directly communicate it to his wife and ends up terrifying her which ultimately seals his fate.
Apparently the versions that i will see in the theater are the horrible restorations.
Has anyone seen the restorations? I remember asking Drake and he said no, now i ask everyone.
Either way i’m going to see, and i’ll tell if they look as horrible as everyone says.
https://twitter.com/zizz_0/status/1307404772966912005
Finger error, wrong page, should comment on WKW page not in 2003
It won’t seriously bother me if you don’t do this by the time you update your 2003 page but I truly do hope you rewatch Dogville. I definitely think it’s a MP and I actually don’t think it’s that ugly of a film. I think it’s so much closer with Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark than you do – I’d probably say 100-150 after one viewing – and to be honest I don’t think there’s much at all different here visually and aesthetically, which is surprising given the fact that it’s literally shot on a soundstage.
I think it has so much in common with A History of Violence and The White Ribbon – both films released afterward of course – but at the same time it’s just innately von Trier: the camera movement, the editing style, the depiction of a female outcast in a town that hates her, and really just the overall visual realization (digital cameras are crucial here) in general; it’s clearly from the same man who directed Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark.
Watched Bong’s Memories of Murder for the 2nd time and was very impressed. Just curious why only a Recommend? I’ve heard some people refer to it as South Korea’s Zodiac. And while I’m not saying it’s on par with Fincher’s Zodiac (2007) it’s definitely a fascinating film and extremely well made. Similar to his other work it’s a phenomenal mix of intrigue, black humor, action, and complex characters. It has a noir like atmosphere with near constant rain in the 2nd half of the film, chain smoking detectives, and a noir like use of light/colors. Great camera work and use of overhead shots in several scenes as well. And similar to Zodiac there is a lack of resolution that is a result of it being based on a real life case (although it was actually solved years after the movie was released). Now that I’ve seen this, Parasite (2019), Snowpiercer (2013) The Host (2007), and Mother (2009) I can confidently say Bong has an ability to change moods and tone throughout a film that is really special. Looking forward to rewatching some of the ones I just mentioned.
@Drake-Cafe Lumiere is rated as a MS and Mystic River as a MS/MP but Cafe Lumiere is 3rd. Mystic River is 4th?
@Malith- thank you – should be fixed now
What is your opinion on Paul Bettany in Master and Commander? I think he is not worthy of best performances but he is still pretty solid.
@RujK- yep, agreed. Not worthy of one of the best of the year- but still very good.
One of these days, this list will read:
1. Lost in Translation
2. Dogville
@Zane- haha maybe- you could be right- but I was forced to look at some screenshots from it when putting this page together and I was tempted to remove it from the archives altogether based on that.
@Drake- Believe me, that would’ve been one of the greatest pleasures of my life. 😌😌
And even though you did not remove it, your words that you were about to, are music to my ears.
@Drake – Artistry always prevails.
@Zane- yep agreed- the evidence is in the text
Hey, Drake. Fantastic page, as always, but I’m fairly sure Finding Nemo was directed by Andrew Stanton, not Lee Unkrich.
@Pedro- Thank you- I think it is both actually- but I’ve added Stanton next to Unkrich on the page. Appreciate the help.
Oh, both makes sense.
Cmon, why a downgrade for Oldboy?
@RK – I don’t think it was. I don’t believe it was ever more than a HR/MS but Drake can correct me if I’m wrong. Also I asked if he had a chance to see Old Boy again before this page and he said it was on the soon to watch list but not before this page.
For the record I have Old Boy as a huge MP and the 4th best film of the decade (and yes I realize that is way higher than the consensus)
@James Trapp and Zane – yeah, I could be wrong about the ranking, I have a reminiscence that it would have been an MS before the update, but the position on the top 10 ranking didn’t change (still at the 10th slot).
@James Trapp – I’m actually on the same page with you on this one – glad to see you have it that high. It’s actually my 5th of the decade and my #44 all time (and I’m pretty confident about it, since I have seen it propably 40-60 times “:D”).
@RK – “40-60 times” wow!
yeah I’m working on putting a top 100 list together and have Old Boy comfortably in the top 50. It was one of those films where the moment it ended it I immediately labeled a MP, just mesmerizing both in terms of the visuals and narrative. The level of violence is insane but it never feels exploitative similar to another South Korean gem, I Saw the Devil (2010). These both make American film violence seem paltry in comparison but again it does not feel cheap or unnecessary.
I love this Ebert quote on it:
“content does not make a movie good or bad — it is merely what it is about. “Oldboy” is a powerful film not because of what it depicts, but because of the depths of the human heart which it strips bare.”
I look forward to Drake’s thoughts after a rewatch. I’ll post more of my own thoughts then.
Oldboy wasn’t downgraded, what are you talking about? Go to Park Chan-wook’s page and you can see the grade hasn’t changed.
Memories of Murder (2003)
– Fascinating film, like Fincher’s Zodiac it is more than just a crime procedural, it is also a character study, a mediation on obsession, and of course like Zodiac we get no resolution
– Humor throughout the film, Bong can mix humor with dark subject matter as well as anyone, perhaps the funniest scene occurs early on when Song drop kicks his new partner as he mistakes him for a man assaulting a woman when he’s actually helping her. Apparently, this drop kick was completely improvised
– Great scene around 28 min where the investigators are trying to have Kwang-ho reenact the crimes (before they realized he was innocent) in front of reporters and other onlookers and they mess up; this scene might as well be a microcosm of the entire situation as the film demonstrates the ineptitude of the small-town police department. This is fact serves much of the film’s humor.
– Interestingly, Bong made a list of 20 questions he would ask the murderer as the film is based on a real-life murder investigation that was unsolved at the time the movie was made (the real-life case was later solved)
– Great blocking starting near the 34 min, Bong uses close ups effectively throughout the film as well. Another great shot at 37:20 of the investigators eating then Kwang-ho getting new shoes which turn out to be bootleg Nikes…hilarious
– Bong intentionally uses very few primary colors, instead opting to use grab colors such as gray and dark green making it look at times like a Jean-Pierre Melville film, particularly Army of Shadows. The only scenes with bright colors are the opening and closing scenes which feature the bright yellow wheat fields which almost look like a scene from Days of Heaven (although certainly not as beautiful no offense to Bong)
– Even with the intentionally muted colors there are still beautiful shots including one at 1:18:42 that demonstrates multiple depths of field and elevations
– Loved the final shot of Song Kang-Ho character breaking the 4th wall not with words but stare
– Song Kang-Ho is one hell of an actor, this might be my favorite performance of his yet, very close between this and Parasite. He is captivating throughout the film and is a more complex character than he initially appears; yes, he engages in abusive tactics, but we see how the case wears on him, and he does seem more compassionate than he lets on.
– There is an intimacy to this film, it’s like we are living with the characters seeing not just them working to solve the crimes but all the stuff happening in between from meals to them drinking and singing at karaoke bars
– My final verdict: MS/MP
“I watch Bad Santa every year during the holidays.”
Me too! With my siblings we always watch either that or Harold and Kumar 3 the Christmas one. I watch so many art films it’s fun to go for some straight ridiculous comedies although I actually think Billy Bob gives a great performance in Bad Santa.
Hey Drake, why have you bolded some films in the list?
The bolded films are the ones that have whole pages on them, they are hyperlinked here.
If Kill Bill Vol 1 and 2 combined was viewed as one film (which I believe is consistent with how Tarantino views them) and was released in 2003 would it get the # 1 spot?
I’m wondering if you ever considered the Battlestar Galactica mini series as a recomendable film? I’d have it closer to HR myself. There are many things to praise about it. Top of the list are performances from Mary McDonnell and Edward James Olmos, iconic way of shooting spacecraft scenes and battles (whip pan’s and quick zooms) showing scale and speed whilst keeping almost a documentary style, good writing, use of soft focus on characters in background, long opening establishing shot. Formal use of colour red and repeated music for cylons. Shaky cam almost dogma 95 lite in space… almost
@Jagman- Thanks for sharing this but I have not seen this one. When I do venture into a series show it is usually to follow a director/auteur
Hi Drake, regarding your last comment there, is there any other series other than true detective (fukunaga) and too old to die young (refn) that made it into the archives?
also, it seems like some of your comments on this page got removed, would have liked to read those 🙁
thank you for creating my favourite film site.
@oliver- I don’t know if they qualify as a “series” but Kieslowski’s Dekalog is in the archives for sure. Small Axe from Steve McQueen and The Underground Railroad from Barry Jenkins certainly impressed in recent years. There are a few others over the years but not many.
You can also count We Are Who We Are, I Know This Much Is True, John Adams, and Berlin Alexanderplatz among those. Maybe pushing the definition a bit, but I also found it interesting watching Les Vampires earlier this year given how much it felt structured like a modern television series. Feels like a bit of a full circle thing seeing auteurs return to a form of episodic storytelling that was common in the silent era. I’ll be keen to explore more of Louis Feuillade’s serials at some point as well.
He has also archived homecoming by Sam Esmail. Mr Robot went for one season too long but I thought it had the better episodes. One episode is presented as a single shot and should come into the discussion of best long shots.