Sun Star Online Edition Banner

contact us

February 22, 2004

 

Top Ten Movies of 2004

I love movies. And with Oscar time approaching, I feel it would be only prudent to siphon out ten of the best movies from the 150 some-odd theatrical releases of 2004. It's important to note that these selections don't necessarily abide by any stringent empirical standards. Rather, they are the movies that I loved and would recommend to any willing audience. Watch them. Love them. Join me.

I wish Jim Carrey could find his rhythm. Back and forth he goes between absurd exuberance and somber slight-of-hand. Much the same way that I feel about Adam Sandler in "Punch Drunk Love," it's infuriating to see an actor's potential and then witness a grand squandering with the likes of "Anger Management" or, in the case of Jim Carrey, "Lemony Snicket" or some other overdone travesty.

But "Eternal Sunshine" is Carrey at his best. The film plays out in a way that challenges the boundaries of the medium without the need for an exorbitant budget. More importantly, it shows that a highly abstract script (by the likes of Charlie Kaufman) can work word for word.

It's hard to justify a remake when the original is sound. But, like repeating themes, pertinent stories remain pertinent. Unfortunately, our generation considers '80s flicks "timeless classics." So, in order to transfer valuable messages to a new audience without necessarily incorporating them into new, perhaps lesser stories, Hollywood gave birth to the remake.

True, the remake is a profit whore with a strong likelihood of collapsing under its own hackneyed weight, but every once in a while a film slips through which makes the whole rehash process worth it. "The Manchurian Candidate" is one such film.

Especially relevant today, "Candidate" inspects the mechanisms behind intricate political agendas. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

When I say that romantic comedies are bad, I don't mean it as in bad for the quality of film in general (even though they are responsible for the overall dumbing down of the medium). No, I mean bad as in for humanity.

"But they celebrate love," you say. No, they celebrate an illusion of love which, when subscribed to, is responsible for a severe misrepresentation of the emotion. So much so that I believe many relationships begin with a false note directly linked to these sorts of movies.

And "Closer" is the cure. Presenting relationships in a far more realistic light, "Closer" constructs a scenario where no one is innocent or particularly likable. Having been raised on movies like "Pretty Woman" and "When Harry Met Sally," I feel it's about time.

It has to be some sort of record when two versions of the same horror movie not only garner critical acclaim, but score big at the box office.

While not nearly as politically or socially conscious as its predecessor, 2004's "Dawn of the Dead" is a worthy remake balancing gore with apocalyptic prophesizing. Director Zack Snyder understood what made the original work and accelerated that into a far more action-oriented take for today's audiences.

Strong performances, a healthy dose of blood, and stylized action; what more could any self-respecting horror geek ask for?

Why was this movie so good? There are a multitude of reasons why this movie shouldn't have worked. Whether it be the conversion to digital film, the decision to conform the events to one night, or the stretches of character, "Collateral" dodged so many pitfalls that said acrobatics are more than enough to sing its praises.

But "Collateral" goes on to construct an airtight film that somehow compromises wild implausibility with gritty, urban realism. I even believed Tom Cruise as a gray-speckled assassin with a penchant for philosophy. C'mon, that's half of the work right there.

Pixar appears to be Hollywood's new golden child. Infallibly producing yearly animated features that not only break the top five in total gross, but receive some of the most glowing reviews possible from hardened critics the world over.

"The Incredibles" works as a kids' flick, a social satire, a spy-action romp, and artistic achievement. There are people who would sell that kind of versatility on cable for $19.99. You get it for about eight bucks. Nice.

I love Morgan Spurlock. I love him. I have made the commitment necessary to make the bond that love entails. Now if only he would return my calls. Morgan, why won't you let me love you?

"Super Size Me" is the new war cry against a nation of fatties and fatties-in-training. "But I like an occasional Big Mac. I mean, it's only occasional." Why do you want to die so much, fatty? Seriously, stop running (well, it's probably more of a desperate waddle flailing rogue flaps of reserve Big Macs from side to side) to your graves and watch "Super Size Me."

And tell Morgan to drop the charges.

I know, I know. You've never seen "The Machinist." You've probably never even heard of "The Machinist." That's okay, I forgive you. And the DVD gods will forgive you too.

Shot in Spain, "The Machinist" serves up the tortured journey of Trevor Reznik (Christian Bale) as he deals with a year-long bout of insomnia and an ever-pervasive conspiracy against his life. Conspiracy? What conspiracy?

From Brad Anderson, the director who gave us the insanely underrated "Session 9," "The Machinist" offers suspense done right.

Christian Bale, now he – maybe – should eat a Big Mac. Watch it, you'll see.

Do you think it shallow of me to put "Spider-Man 2" so high up on the list; or even on the list at all? Oh, get over yourself, "Spider-Man 2" was an amazing film. Comic book movies are damn hard and this wall-crawling adventure is possibly the best of its kind since "Superman." Since "Superman," people.

I refuse to keep "Spider-Man 2" off the list simply because it can be so easily dismissed by audiences as a "kids film," or a "summer flick." To its core, "Spider-Man 2" is solid moviemaking, fusing story and special effects so that they actually compliment each other. Say it with me now...compliment.

Here it is, the grand poo-pa. No movie of 2004 deserves attention more than "Shaun of the Dead." It's almost unbelievable that the film was produced for under $30 million dollars. It just goes to show that there are still people out there who love film and are willing to put their heart and soul into making it the best it can be.

"Shaun of the Dead" defies all logic. It follows very few cinematic standards and yet works on almost all of them. Most of all, "Shaun of the Dead" is fun at a time when sitting in a theatre for two hours is very nearly becoming a chore. Kudos my zombie-loving brethren. Kudos.



<

Comment on this story...


Sun Star Newspaper • P.O. Box 756640 • Fairbanks, Alaska 99775
fystar@uaf.edu • editorial (907) 474-6039 • advertising (907) 474-5078