Via Andrew Sullivan, the movie critic of the New Yorker (Anthony Lane) thinks 2005 was underwhelming (or, more critically, just rotten) for movies.
I think I agree. I don't think I saw anything this year that was very good. I also think 2005 saw the fewest number of movies I've seen in a theater in many a year.
Posted by baltar at January 9, 2006 03:56 PM | TrackBack | Posted to MoviesFYI: The direct link isn't working, it goes to an error page, but you can find it by moving the cursor over "in the magazine," clicking on "this week's contents," and clicking on Anthony Lane's piece. That this year was underwhelming, I agree. That The Usual Suspect was a great example of American film, I disagree.
Posted by: Morris at January 9, 2006 04:32 PM | PERMALINKSorry Morris: My goof.
My HTML is weak today.
(Fixed, by the way.)
Posted by: baltar at January 9, 2006 04:38 PM | PERMALINKI disagree. Look at these:
1. Brokeback Mountain
2. Narnia
3. Capote
4. King Kong
5. Walk the Line
6. War of the Worlds
I think pretty much every year is a good year for movies as long as you are willing to look hard enough. I thought Walk the Line and Syriana were excellent, Red Eye was great (as what it was), The Squid and the Whale and Mysterious Skin were a little disturbing but really, really well done, Stay was a great ride, and we saw what was probably the best Harry Potter film yet. And I haven't even seen a lot of the award winners yet.
Maybe movies aren't what they once were (Anthony Lane knows a lot more than me on that point). But there are still plenty of things to enjoy if you look for (and can find) them.
Posted by: Armand at January 10, 2006 03:58 PM | PERMALINKOh Dear, John, you should not get Baltar started on War of the Worlds.
And of the other five, only two have come to our town.
Posted by: binky at January 11, 2006 09:22 AM | PERMALINKI don't dispute the fact that Tom has quite literally "jumped the couch". I truly feel War of the Worlds matched the orginal interpretation of Wells' work in overall greatness and the film surpassed the 1950s version for me in that I identified with the family. I actually had a stress headache by the time the closing credits rolled.
Posted by: John at January 11, 2006 10:52 AM | PERMALINKWell, John, as binky noted, I disagree fairly strongly with that. War of the Worlds was, I thought, a horrific movie.
I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are some good movies made every year. That being said, I thought 2005 contained fewer good/interesting movies than other years.
As binky notes (again), we're in a fairly out-of-the-way town for movies. Perhaps good movies came out, and never made it us (even on DVD: the best movie rental store in town is Blockbuster, and we know how good they are.
Posted by: baltar at January 11, 2006 11:31 AM | PERMALINKbaltar,
I'm sorry you are in an out-of-the-way town. Living in a huge city, I see many great films come and go. Perhaps my exposure to such gems as A Home at the End of the World (2004) makes me more lenient on movies like War of the Worlds.
Posted by: John at January 12, 2006 01:48 PM | PERMALINKJohn - And now you've got a movie for ME to disagree with you about. I wasn't impressed by A Home at the End of the World. I didn't strongly dislike it, but it wasn't what I hoped it would be (except for the begining, which I thought was great).
But hey, I've got one good thing to mention from the year in 2005 - Binky and I saw Breakfast on Pluto last night, and while I didn't love it (though it's a nice, well-crafted film), I was simply astounded by Cillian Murphy's performance. Give that guy some awards - he was spectacular. And just for fun watch that and Red Eye back to back. Murphy's got an amazing range.
Posted by: Armand at January 12, 2006 02:11 PM | PERMALINKNo, not really. Actually I thought the music and fashion were some of the best things about Breakfast on Pluto.
That said if I never heard I Will Survive again, I doubt I'd miss it.
Posted by: Armand at January 12, 2006 03:48 PM | PERMALINKSpeaking of movies, check out this photo of Guy Pearce!
Posted by: binky at January 12, 2006 04:08 PM | PERMALINKWho is Guy Pearce, and who's the dude who looks like Andy Warhol?
Posted by: baltar at January 12, 2006 04:27 PM | PERMALINKPearce is playing Warhol.
Normal (or, what counts for normal in a hollywood pose
Posted by: binky at January 12, 2006 04:40 PM | PERMALINK