Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 78

Thread: Critics' Darlings: The Films of 2003

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,843

    Critics' Darlings: The Films of 2003

    Metacritic.com is a site that collects the major print reviews and assigns a score on a 100-point scale to each(when the critic doesn't do so). The scores for a given film are then averaged. These are the films released in 2003 with the highest critical scores:
    93 LOTR: THE RETURN OF THE KING
    92 FINDING NEMO
    AMERICAN SPLENDOR
    LOST IN TRANSLATION
    90 THE SON (Belgium)
    CAPTURING THE FREEDMANS
    88 TRIPLETS OF BELLEVILLE
    MAROONED IN IRAK (Iran)
    RUSSIAN ARK (Russia)
    SWEET SIXTEEN
    87 MAN WITHOUT A PAST (Finland)
    LOVE AND DIANE
    86 SCHOOL OF ROCK
    TO BE AND TO HAVE (France)
    MYSTIC RIVER
    85 RAISING VICTOR VARGAS
    MAGDALENE SISTERS
    SPIDER
    BUS174
    84 TEN (Iran)
    THIRTEEN
    83 LILYA 4-EVER (Swe/Den)
    WINGED MIGRATION (Fran)
    82 A MIGHTY WIND
    MY ARCHITECT
    MASTER AND COMMANDER
    THE FOG OF WAR
    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED
    WHALE RIDER
    81 CHARLOTTE SOMETIMES
    SPELLBOUND
    80 CITY OF GOD (Brasil)
    OT:OUR TOWN
    78 BLUE CAR
    DIRTY PRETTY THINGS
    SECRET LIVES OF DENTISTS
    77 28 DAYS LATER
    MAN ON THE TRAIN (Fra)
    76 DIVINE INTERVENTION (Palestine)
    JAPON (Mexico)
    28 DAYS LATER (UK)
    THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND
    75 HOLES
    LAWLESS HEART
    74 LOST IN LA MANCHA
    NOWHERE IN AFRICA (Germany)
    SEABISCUIT
    73 CHIHWASEON (So. Korea)
    GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING
    SHATTERED GLASS
    STOKED
    72 ALL THE REAL GIRLS
    BALSEROS (Spain)
    COLD MOUNTAIN
    ELEPHANT
    FREAKY FRIDAY
    SWIMMING POOL
    FELLINI:I'M A BORN LIAR (Ita/Fra)
    70 FRIDAY NIGHT
    THE HOUSEKEEPER (Fra)
    X2
    71 INTOLERABLE CRUELTY
    69 BETTER LUCK TOMMOROW
    68 BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM
    Last edited by oscar jubis; 01-02-2004 at 04:44 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,650

    Movies That Nobody Sees???

    What's the good of a list of good movies that nobody sees? I don't recognize any of these movies except "Finding Nemo" and "Holes," "28 Days Later" (just opened over the weekend) and "BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM" and "X2." Your list makes me feel like I'm on some freakn' moon or the planet Mars.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,843
    I've often wondered why your posts refer solely to the most ubiquitous Hollywood movies. Do you live in a small town, far from SLC? This is a list of films released in the USA that have received most favorable print media reviews. 27 of the 33 films listed have had theatrical releases here (the other 6 had festival screenings and will be released soon) and Miami is not a big market like NYC, LA, Chicago, Frisco, Philly, etc.

    If theatres near you are not showing these films, I recommend you print the list and take a chance on a few titles when released for rental (most will be out before year's end). If you don't like them, at least you won't feel like you're "on some freakn' moon". There are some real "crowd pleasers" listed, like RAISING VICTOR VARGAS (USA), WHALE RIDER(New Zealand), CITY OF GOD, and the Oscar-winner NOWHERE IN AFRICA; documentaries like the American CAPTURING THE FRIEDMANS and SPELLBOUND, and the gorgeous WINGED MIGRATION; sensitive dramas like BLUE CAR, ALL THE REAL GIRLS, SWEET 16, CHARLOTTE SOMETIMES and THE SON; and two highly original, unique movie experiences: DIVINE INTERVENTION and RUSSIAN ARK(admired in this site by everyone who posted about it).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,650

    Lost In the Backwaters

    Appears that I am adrift in the sea of "ubiquitous Hollywood." Alas I am corrupted and condemned to mediocrity.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,656

    Re: Lost In the Backwaters

    Originally posted by tabuno
    Appears that I am adrift in the sea of "ubiquitous Hollywood." Alas I am corrupted and condemned to mediocrity.
    Have no fear, Tango Tango. They invented home video for you.

    The critics "darlings" are usually sooooo PC. I think most critics don't want to fall into the trap Pauline Kael did when she panned 2001: A Space Odyssey. Poor girl. She never lived that one down....

    GRAB A SPINE, YOU YUPPIE CRITICS! I really hate the ones who think that panning say, The Matrix Reloaded is chic but dismissing say, Ozon's Swimming Pool is uber-intelligent.

    Give me a break. I read Film Comment (one of only 2 film mags I subscribe to) and they narrowly avoid this. (I guess it's because they are "smart about movies"....)
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,656

    MOTHER AND SON

    Sokurov's "Mother and Son" is screening at the Pacific Cinemateque this summer. After the amazing "Russian Ark", you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be there.
    That theatre is now my 2nd home. This summer is INCREDIBLE: 13 Kurosawa films with newly struck 35 mm prints and restored sound. It's "Rashomon" & "Stray Dog" on sunday night....

    I'm wondering if I should start a Kurosawa thread to discuss the impact the big screen retrospective will have on me..."Seven Samurai" was one night of nirvana I'll never forget...
    Last edited by Johann; 07-09-2003 at 05:49 PM.
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,843
    I would enjoy reading about how these films impact you. Are the films being shown in a particular order? Have you seen them before on video? Is Akira more of a western director, style-wise (his movies remind me of Ford's westerns)? I wonder whether RASHOMON and IKIRU would remain my faves after re-watching them and others. I visited the Cinematheque years ago; they were showing Fritz Lang films. If I remember correctly they offered membership, with reduced admission and other benefits.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,656

    Cinematheque

    As it says on their website, Cinematheques are now like "museums showing the culture of the world". The PC has an unbelievably low membership fee of $3.00 and a double bill is only $8.50! With prices that low, you can spend a LOT of time there.

    As for Kurosawa, I have seen all of the films on video, but some of them only once such as "I Live in Fear" & "High and Low". Kurosawa says he was influenced by Simenon & Ford, so you're right about a "western" style. The PC had the exact retrospective a few months ago. It was a huge success, naturally, so they've decided to run it again- this time with "Dersu-Uzala"- the foreign film Oscar winner in 1975. (replacing Seven Samurai which just had a run)

    I talked to the manager about volunteering, etc.. and he mentioned that the theatre has been trying to put a Kubrick retrospective together for YEARS. They want a "complete" retrospective, but they've run into snags with Warner Bros. and other parties. I hope they do it in the future. Manager says "We're trying!, We're trying!" I would DIE to see Barry Lyndon on the big screen....
    Last edited by Johann; 10-05-2003 at 06:11 PM.
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,840

    Back to the MetaCritic list and the comments it gave rise to

    1. ON MAINSTREAM MOVIES VS. "PC" CRITICS:

    Pauline Kael's panning 2001: a Space Odyssey is a bad example of critical stupidity, because a lot of people still pan it and it is, arguably, very uneven. I was more alienated by her condemnation of A Clockwork Orange, which I thought was way off on her part and rather prissy. But anyway Pauline Kael is a bad choice of critics to use as a punching bag because she's the best we've ever had. Ms. Kael was a great movie critic not because of her specific judgements (you're never going to agree 100% with anybody) but because she was smart and enthusiastic and knew movies better than anybody else. And she was never, never PC.

    Are critics in general, in fact, "so PC"? I don't think so. Most of them aren't even political, with the exception of ones in The Nation and a few other places. The thing is, they see a lot of movies. That makes their taste more sophisticated than average. I like critics for how well they write and how well they defend their choices, not for their orientation. I like Roger Ebert, and I like J. Hoberman. They are two of my favorites because they're both smart and write very well; but they're miles apart.

    I must say Johan is a complex and rather mysterious individual if he can see every Kurosawa film and then knock critics for not loving mainstream movies (they often do). Johan is on a rather special diet himself.

    2. PROS AND CONS OF THE METACRITIC LIST:

    Not being in the boonies and willing and able to go to bigger urban centers to catch up when I miss out, I've seen a lot -- well, two thirds -- of the MetaCritic list Oscar Jubis listed above and I think it's a pretty fine list. I don't agree with every choice. Some of the ones I haven't seen, I chose not to see, probably mistakenly. I am at the opposite end of the spctrum from tabuno: I still haven't seen Finding Nemo. I know I'm missing something everybody likes.

    The critics list is more offbeat than the lists of those of us who only see the mainstream movies, because they've had a chance to look around. It's not because they're "so PC," but because they have a wider spectrum to choose from and, being who and where they are, they have sophisticated taste. Would anyone who had seen all the summer blockbusters not be looking for something different from that?

    How wrong it is to congratulate ourselves on what we don't know or haven't seen.

    Looking over the MetaCritic list, I'm particularly glad to see Charlotte, Sometimes listed so high. One's I've missed and why it happened (I saw all the others and I am very glad that I did, in a number of cases delighted: the year has included some wonderful movies):

    *92 FINDING NEMO. An oversight. Must see it.
    *87 MAN WITHOUT A PAST (Finland) Slipped away quickly. Sounded a bit offbeat for my taste.
    *MAGDALENE SISTERS Am still trying to see it. Friends said not to go to it alone and everyone I asked to go with had seen it.
    *84 TEN (Iran) Slipped away quickly. Do not leap to see Iranian films. My shortdcoming no doubt, but I have my reasons.
    *83 LILYA 4-EVER (Swe/Den) Sounded very depressing; quickly gone from here.
    *82 A MIGHTY WIND. Sounded irritating; not my kind of thing, I guess. The dog show satire was quite well done, though I wouldn't have seen it if it hadn't been shown on a plane flight I was on.
    *OT:OUR TOWN. Don't know what this one is.
    *78 BLUE CAR. Ditto.
    *THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND. Still hoping to see and it's still showing locally.
    *LAWLESS HEART. Don't know what this one is.
    *74 LOST IN LA MANCHA. Sorry I missed it; ran only one week. Saw the preview a zillion times, which can kill the desire to see a movie.
    *BALSEROS (Spain). Hard to find; just missed it in NYC.
    *FELLINI:I'M A BORN LIAR (Ita/Fra). Don't know what happened to this one. I would certainly like to see it.
    *70 FRIDAY NIGHT. Not sure what this one is. IMDb's listing for it is blank!

    http://www.chrisknipp.com
    Last edited by Chris Knipp; 09-30-2003 at 01:39 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,656

    Metacritic

    I am unfamiliar with metacritic, but you bring up some interesting points Chris.

    My appreciation of films is indeed complex. Incredibly complex. I remember the essential of pretty much every film I've seen.

    I get really angry when I read a well-known critic's review of a film and he takes a perspective that the film does not deserve. (Ebert does that now and then- he can be very glib).

    I guess I definitely feel passionate and certain about what a great film is, a good film is, a bad film is.. etc..
    Critics like Ebert (who I admire greatly) who have seen the majority of say, Kurosawa's canon must be scrutinized for those reviews that give a sweeping "thumbs up" to a blockbuster film. I am highly critical of those types. Kael included. I love Pauline, but man, I disagreed with her in almost every review! I understood her perspective completely- she can WRITE, but I felt she was missing an aspect of criticism that is essential: come to the film on it's own terms.

    Mysterious? I don't know. How am I mysterious? I think I'm usually very frank on this site. I never say something in passing. It all has meaning to me. (these posts are archived- better say what you mean)
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,840
    It's nice to be thought mysterious, Johann, don't knock it.

    We seem to be pretty much in agreement on Kael.

    Ebert can make pretty glaring mistakes sometimes, I agree. I read a book-length collection of his stuff once and found he'd gotten a number of dates wrong. But since I started writing a lot of movie reviews myself about 18 months ago, my admiration for Ebert has grown. The elementary thing I admire about him is how succinctly and entertainingly he can sum up a film. That's an art, and he's a master of it. He is very positive, and almost never mean, and I admire that. Meanness is easy and cheap; large-spiritedness takes character. I admire Ebert for championing small movies like Charlotte, Sometimes and Better Luck Tomorrow this year, and every year. Sure, he gives the thumbs up a bit too often, especially for dubious blockbusters. But he has brought intelligence to mainstream movie criticism; he maintains a high standard in his writing. He doesn't have the passion that Siskel had, and Siskel's replacement is only that, a replacement.

    metacritic.com is a site that Oscar Jubis spoke of at the top of this thread where he cited the list of movies I was commenting on just now, explaining which ones I hadn't seen from that list. He said "Metacritic.com is a site that collects the major print reviews and assigns a score on a 100-point scale to each(when the critic doesn't do so). The scores for a given film are then averaged.". Then he listed the critics' top rated films, and that was followed by tabuno's complaint: "What's the good of a list of good movies that nobody sees? I don't recognize any of these movies except "Finding Nemo" and "Holes," "28 Days Later" (just opened over the weekend) and "BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM" and "X2." Your list makes me feel like I'm on some freakn' moon or the planet Mars."

    My last response was in reply to these.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,843
    Originally posted by Chris Knipp
    FRIDAY NIGHT. Not sure what this one is. IMDb's listing for it is blank!

    Look for it under its original title Vendredi Soir. It did not open in Miami but the dvd will be released on November 11th. I can't afford to miss any film directed by arguably the best active female director (sorry Breillat and Campion and new-generation Coppola and Makhmalbaf). Ms. Claire Denis directed Chocolat (no, not that Chocolat), Nennette and Boni, I Can't Sleep and Beau Travail.
    Last edited by oscar jubis; 09-30-2003 at 09:09 PM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,840
    Ah, yes, Vendredi soir! Released in France in 2001, here earlier this year. I wrote about it. Must have repressed it.

    That one is certainly in the "critics' darlings" category. It got generally high marks from critics in France and the US. I'm afraid I am emphatically one of the nay-sayers. I have liked her previous films, especially Nénette et Boni, I Can't Sleep and Beau travail, though it took a while to come around in the latter case. In the case of Vendredi soir, I doubt that repeated viewings would warm me to it, if indeed I were willing to submit to them...

    “Le film est pourtant interminable.”—Joelle, Critiques ordinaries.
    httpcritiques-ordinaires.ouvaton.org/article.php3?id_article=63

    Among the few French nay-sayers, the words "banal" and "banalité" were used. http://www.allocine.fr/film/critique...&affpub=0.html

    You say," I can't afford to miss any film directed by arguably the best active female director (sorry Breillat and Campion and new-generation Coppola and Makhmalbaf)." Well, apporaching it in that spirit, you will almost certainly be in the other camp from me, and won't want to read what I wrote till much later anyway--
    http://www.chrisknipp.com/writing/viewtopic.php?t=113

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,843

    How I use film criticism

    Originally posted by Chris Knipp
    you will almost certainly be in the other camp from me, and won't want to read what I wrote till much later anyway

    Indeed, Chris. I try to avoid reading reviews of a given film until after I've seen it and formed an opinion. But I actually feel confident that my take will truly be my own anyway. I don't form opinions about a director's film based on his/her previous films. For instance, I am a fan of Solondz and Rudolph, and I really didn't like their latest releases. I hope the fact that I've admired Denis' previous films does not guarantee I will like Friday Night. It means I have to give it a chance.

    I have been updating the list of critically lauded films, as compiled at metacritic.com. (I just added Thirteen, To Be And To Have and Lost in Translation). I just take note of the scores of films without reading any of the reviews available. I have found that this site does the best job of providing a quick way to survey critical consensus. Rotten Tomatoes, for example, divides reviews crudely into fresh or rotten, and includes very amateur electronic media reviews.

    By the way, I also try to maintain an open mind when reading reviews of a movie after I've seen it, and give consideration to opposing points of view. I've often concluded that I need to give a film a second viewing. Ghost Dog and Eyes Wide Shut are two films that come to mind which required a second viewing for me to fully appreciate.

    On the other hand, I've learned more about cinema from Jonathan Rosenbaum (Chicago Reader) than from anybody (I worship the guy); it's remarkable then how often I disagree with him. No matter how many times I read his reviews of Pistol Opera, Secret Lives of Dentists and Le Divorce(to name recent examples), I don't like them. I simply respond differently to these movies than he does. I love his writing because I always understand exactly the why of his opinion and because he helps me understand the reasons behind my own responses.
    I apologize if I went too far off topic.
    Last edited by oscar jubis; 10-01-2003 at 01:15 AM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,840

    Sir, I do not question your integrity....

    Points well taken. And noble sentiments.

    Needless to say, reading reviews after seeing a film means more. Whether to read them beforehand is an individual matter.

    But you'll grant that we all go to the movies with prejudices. Having responded negatively to Vendredi Soir, I'm inclined to think that the generally admiring response her film got in France was due in large part to Claire Denis's excellent reputation there prior to the film's coming out. Not everyone is as high minded and unbiased as you.

    I believe in revising opinions too -- but also in staying true to one's gut reaction, if there was one.

    I agree about the unreliabilty of Rotten Tomatoes, but I don't think you can trust any of these numerical ratings no matter who does them. Sometimes like our elections in reality it's way too close to call. And then there is the manner in which time alters judgments: people rave about a film and six months later forget it, or on reconsidering or re-seeing it, find that it comes alive for them at last -- or is much less brilliant than it originally seemed. I have little use for numerical ratings, and think Ebert and Roeper's Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down system is probably better.

    The value of a really well written review is that it creates a world of discourse for those who read it. Whether they agree or disagree with it, they cut their critical teeth by forming responses to it and to other good criticism. This is what you're saying about Rosenbaum, whose reviews I should read more of to find out what all the fuss is about.

    I felt I was badly misled by David Denby's review of Thirteen, which I read before I went to see it. Often people do read reviews to see if a movie sounds worth seeing; and some reviewers, perhaps the majority of the popular ones, consider it their function to send us to see a film or warn us off. Denby gave me no inkling of how unpleasant this film would be to watch. It made me nervous and downright sick at the stomach. Now that's a gut reacton!

    http://www.chrisknipp.com
    Last edited by Chris Knipp; 10-01-2003 at 03:50 AM.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •