BEST MOVIES OF 2010 -- so far

[oscar jubis]

*I haven't seen any of the four movies you listed, Chris. There are so many movies being released on a very limited basis. It's impossible to watch everything that seems worth watching. I hope to eventually watch Inception, Despicable Me, Toy Story 3, The Kids are Alright and a few others. It's expensive also. I cannot always afford to go. I have seen some pretty good movies that I don't think you have seen. It's only natural under this distribution system. Jeunet's Micmacs, for instance, is quite charming and richly imagined. Cell 211, which won 8 Spanish Academy awards, is about as good as prison flicks get. Sometimes I miss out on the wide release films because I don't want to miss films like these which stay in theaters very briefly.

*Stray Dog is very good. You are right to take note of the cinematography.

*Print critics, especially youngish ones who write for daily newspapers, often don't have passion for cinema or knowledge of the history of the art form.They may have more of an interest in the stars than the actual movies. They are hired based on writing skills rather than expertise (which the ones doing the hiring don't know how to assess) or passion. On-line critics are enthusiastic film buffs who often have mediocre writing skills.Of course I am generalizing.

[Chris Knipp]

INCEPTION
SOUTH OF THE BORDER
THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT
THE LOTTERY

I haven't seen any of the four movies you listed, Chris. There are so many movies being released on a very limited basis.

A lot of people will see INCEPTION and pretty many will see THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT, since it's so highly praised. THE LOTTERY just opened today and SOUTH OF THE BORDER is in limited rolling out release, but you expressed contempt for it in advance and the intention of avoiding it (I don't see it listed as coming to Florida on their website schedule). Quite possibly THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT would please you (more than me).

Print critics are perhaps being phased out so no need to generalize about them, but your generalization probably always applied: they were hired as good writers, not passionate cinephiles, and very often might review other things as well as movies.

[Chris Knipp]

The San Francisco Film Society, which puts on the SFIFF, has some theatrical screenings at the Sundance Kabuki, the SFIFF main headquarters at festival time in May. They have a screen ongoingly available there. The first title is new to me; the others are familiar from the SFIFF of this year or Lincoln Center events.

San Francisco, CA -- The Two Escobars (USA 2010), Jeff and Michael Zimbalist's captivating telling of the tragically entwined stories of infamous drug lord Pablo Escobar and star soccer defender Andrés Escobar, opens Friday, August 27 on SFFS Screen at the Sundance Kabuki Cinemas.

Also coming to SFFS Screen

July 30: Alamar Pedro González-Rubio's lovingly made story of the growing bond between a father and son, who are spending a summer together on Mexico's Caribbean coast, demonstrates exquisite poetry and sophisticated craft.

August 6: Making Plans for Lena In Christophe Honoré's latest work a family weekend in the Breton countryside spirals out of control for recent divorcée Lena (Chiara Mastroianni) when her mother invites her ex over without her knowledge in this New Wave-inspired look at a woman on the verge.

August 13: Vengeance Johnnie To's genre-busting gem populated by a hit man turned chef, family men moonlighting as assassins and earnestly official women detectives stars Johnny Hallyday, the iconic French crooner who exudes cool.

August 20: Army of Crime Robert Guédiguian's lush historical drama focuses on a largely overlooked cell of French Resistance fighters-refugees of the antifascist fight throughout Europe, mostly Jews and communists-led by French Armenian poet Missak Manouchian (Simon Abkarian) and his wife Mélinée (Virginie Ledoyen).

September 3: Dogtooth In Yorgos Lanthimos's new drama the matriarch and patriarch of an upper-class Greek family teach their three college-age offspring an alternate language to protect a larger deception.

September 10: Change of Plans Danièle Thompson's light comedy begins as a group of friends and acquaintances gather for dinner, and the atmosphere couldn't be friendlier. Slowly the masks of civility drop and suspicions, jealousies and fears emerge.

I have seen all of these but DOGTOOTH and Johnnie To's VENGEANCE. I would like to see them and if I can get over there I'll watch them, but the one-time-only scheduling makes it a bit difficult for me. I think they've already screened ALAMAR post-festival. Unfortunately this is only a trickle compared to the programs continually presented by the Film Society of Lincoln Center, not to mention the Pacific Film Archive (which however focuses on older films) in Berkeley. This selection seems somewhat random. I like MAKING PLANS FOR LENA and ALAMAR and have heard good things about VENGEANCE and DOGTOOTH, but CHANGE OF PLANS and THE ARMY OF CRIME are not exceptional.

Local screening the new print of Godard's BREATHLESS.

Apropos of my earlier comment in this thread, "The best movie is always an old one," a nice newly restored 1930's cinema near me, the Realto Cerrito, is showing the renewed print of Jean-Luc Godard's 1960 BREATHLESS three times a day for a week or two. I saw it there this week and enjoyed it and found it indeed in a sense has dated little, even though it's quite nostalgic for me to watch it because it shows the Paris I first visited in my youth and the film itself I saw when quite young. I was struck by how beautiful and transparent Jean Seberg was, a person clearly made for the movie camera and possessed of a touching sweet innocence; also by Belmondo's ease and style on screen and how wasp-thin he was in those days. But artistically what struck me this time was the music -- the way themes identify characters and usher sequences in and out, and create a constant rhythm that provides momentum despite the fact that in a sense not all that much is happening. Anyway I'd say this is still a film worth watching and one that young people who haven't seen it ought to make an effort to see, especially in this pristine-looking new print. This was shown in NYC in late May and A.O. Scott wrote a piece in the NY Times about its contemporary relevance. Some local movie schedules incorrectly identify the Rialto Cerrito screening, confusing it with a new and by reports horrible and unpleasant Korean film also called BREATHLESS, but the San Francisco Chronicle acknowledges the revival of the Godard film with a recent brief telephone interview with Raoul Coutard, the famous cinematographer of the film, by G. Allen Johnson, a Chronicle writer. The newly re-minted Godard BREATHLESS is also showing at the Embarcadero Cinemas in downtown San Francisco.

[oscar jubis]

THE TWO ESCOBARS is produced by sports cable network ESPN. It is part of an excellent series of sports-related documentaries called "30 for 30". I watched it last month. Two others I liked from the series, which deal with subjects I hold dear to my heart, are Billy Corben's The U (about how the U of Miami integrated the city's culture by recruiting local, inner-city kids into the football team and built a sports dynasty during the 80s and 90s) and Run, Ricky, Run, about one of the most unique personalities in the cookie cutter world of professional football.

Do you want me to comment on BREATHLESS here or do we take the discussion to the Breathless thread in the Classic Films section?

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks for the background.

By all means put further comments on BREATHLESS on the BREATHLESS thread already established. I was only noting having seen it in connection with my "an old movie is always best" line a couple days ago on this thread, and as another note of films seen this year. I actually had not seen it in a long time, though I have a laser disk of it, and I still have a laser disk player. I notice some good films came out in 1960 and were immediately shown in US theaters, or in NYC anyway. De Sica's TWO WOMEN and Antonioni's L'AVVENTURA are two others. This would already be at your fingertips, but not mine.

The FSLC/Walter Reade series never end and today comes news of "Russellmania" with the director Ken Russell on hand in person every evening.
* The Boy Friend
* The Devils
* Lisztomania
* Mahler
* The Music Lovers
* Savage Messiah
* Tommy
* Valentino
* Women in Love

Russellmania!
July 30 to August 5
Walter Reade Theater at Lincoln Center.

[oscar jubis]

Ken Russell, uh? The "wizard of excess". I saw a lot of his movies at the time of release when they were inappropriate for someone my age. The only two I've dared to watch recently are TOMMY and WOMEN IN LOVE (Glenda Jackson was among the very best actresses of the 60s and 70s). I like these two. Not fair to Russell to comment on the others. There is a strong element of camp in his work. Many find it repellent, perhaps because he marries camp to highbrow subjects, like the lives of famous classical composers. After Lair of the White Worm (1988), he has made only straight-to-video and TV movies. Not a single movie made for theatrical release in 22 years! But he keeps making them. He is 83 now.

[Chris Knipp]

Again thanks for more background. I never liked him; I'm not into camp (one of the ways I'm not a proper gay person). Those two you mention are good though, quite good. I never walk out of a movie I've paid to see but THE DEVILS severely tried that resolve. He has made lost of movies in those 22 years. How can we be sure they aren't as good -- or as bad -- as his previous theatrical releases? I wonder if THE RAINBOW would be good since it's also D.H. Lawrence, and WOMEN IN LOVE was one of his good ones?

[Chris Knipp]

*I haven't seen any of the four movies you listed, Chris. There are so many movies being released on a very limited basis. It's impossible to watch everything that seems worth watching. I hope to eventually watch Inception, Despicable Me, Toy Story 3, The Kids are Alright and a few others. It's expensive also. I cannot always afford to go. I have seen some pretty good movies that I don't think you have seen. It's only natural under this distribution system. Jeunet's Micmacs, for instance, is quite charming and richly imagined. Cell 211, which won 8 Spanish Academy awards, is about as good as prison flicks get. Sometimes I miss out on the wide release films because I don't want to miss films like these which stay in theaters very briefly.

*Stray Dog is very good. You are right to take note of the cinematography.

*Print critics, especially youngish ones who write for daily newspapers, often don't have passion for cinema or knowledge of the history of the art form.They may have more of an interest in the stars than the actual movies. They are hired based on writing skills rather than expertise (which the ones doing the hiring don't know how to assess) or passion. On-line critics are enthusiastic film buffs who often have mediocre writing skills.Of course I am generalizing.

I finally did see MICMACS but don't find it memorable. I'm not a Jeunet fan; that kind of elaborate mise-en-scène puts me off. I will grant you that it's richly imagined. I haven't seen CELL 211, and as you suggested a number of the limited-release films you got to see in Florida I was unable to see.

[oscar jubis]

Well, it's near impossible to see everything that gets released. And I wonder how many of these critics try to see as many films as you do. I think it is also important to keep in mind that the nature of a film's release (how, when, where and how frequently it is shown) depends on estimated profit potential not perceived artistic value. And that the nature of a film's release affects its ranking in best-of-the-year polls or lists. The main value of polls to me is simply as a guide to which films I should seek out.

What about films that don't get released (in other words, films deemed by the powers that be to have minimal profit potential)? In 2009, I decided not to make a best-of list that excludes them or lists them separately. To do so strikes me as acquiescing to an artificial division based purely on capitalist interests.

Keeping that in mind, I find it interesting to ponder what these polls might say about what the participants value in film. It seems to me, for instance, that the extremely high regard for The Social Network is largely based on the belief that the film reflects "the mood of the age", that it has something profound to say about our culture or society. Otherwise, is it really a better picture than Film Comment #44 The King's Speech? If in fact voters consider a film's contemporaneous social relevance as a variable to consider when assessing a film's artistic value, then I am encouraged by its coronation by polls conducted by Film Comment and IndieWire. However, my experience was that other films, such as Exit Through the Gift Shop, had more to say to me about the current historical moment in our culture than Fincher's fine film.

[Chris Knipp]

I think the big film reviewers almost certainly see more of the regular release films than I do because they get invited to more screenings but I don't know -- yet. If I get to talk to one of the big NY film critics, which could happen at Lincoln Center screenings, I'll ask him or her. As for the issues of releases and distribution you bring up, which have been often discussed by Rosenbaum, they are certainly valid. "Best" lists are I agree useful as checklists of what people will want to try to watch later. A critic who doesn't go to festivals may see fewer of the other films. But a number of the big critics do go to festivals, if not all. Of course in NYC all the big critics see all the NYFF films.

I do not agree that THE KING'S SPEECH is just as good as THE SOCIAL NETWORK. I think the latter has a definite edge because in my view THE SOCIAL NETWORK is more original, THE KING'S SPEECH a grand, beautifully done film, but of a more old-fashioned style. Of course the relevance to today is important; a king's speech defect is hardly a burning issue. But both have universarl relevance -- the scramble to make it big; overcoming personal obstacles -- in both cases or they wouldn't be worth watching. We could argue with the rankings in the FILM COMMENT list. THE KING'S SPEECH might deserve to be higher than #44.

Why do you think EXIT THROUGH THE GIFT SHOP is more relevant to today than THE SOCIAL NETWORK?

[Chris Knipp]

I'll post my 2010 MOVIE BEST LISTS shortly.

I have to take some time yet to write a general comment as a preface.

[oscar jubis]

Exit through the Gift Shop gave me a lot to think about. Your question deserves an essay-long answer. For now, I'll just say that two statements made at the beginning resonate throughout the rest of the film.
1) Bansky's proclaiming that Guetta is a more interesting documentary-subject than he is, even though Bansky correctly thinks (but doesn't say until later) that he himself is clearly more talented as both street artist and filmmaker. It is important to think of the reasons why in this culture , at this time, the less-talented Guetta is indeed a more important documentary subject than Bansky.
2) Shepard Fairey's comment about the nature of power and how a person acquires it in our culture. How the illusion of power, or a "perceived power" can be turned into a real thing by manipulating the sources of mass communication.
There are other significant issues in the film, including material about the concept of art and what it's good for and how it relates to other aspects of the culture, and how things acquire value in society, the authorship of cultural products,etc.

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks. I see what you mean. EXIT THROUGH THE GIFT shop does give one a lot to think about. And it plays clever tricks on the viewer. Too bad we didn't discuss it at the time when the thread on it was opened here way back when it was in theaters.