As I live in Norway, some of these films may have been released in 2008 elsewhere. And there are certainly movies which I will watch in 2010 that may have deserved a spot on this list.
District 9
Neill Blomkamp gave us a gritty and realistic science fiction film in “District 9″. Blomkamp moves away from the usual settings of Hollywood flicks, placing the action in the slums of South Africa, and the parallel it draws to the apartheid in that country is hard to miss. Mixing between shaky-cam mockumentary and traditional action/thriller the movie goes against our expectations and provides both spectacle as well as something to ponder. Every unknown actor in the film puts in a solid performance, and the aliens, who are perfectly realized with CGI that only Blomkamp can make work with the good help of WETA, even manage to make us feel something.
For me, this movie ranks among Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner”, John Carpenter’s “The Thing”, and James Cameron’s “Alien” in terms of vision and ambition. It’s fantastic, has a grim sense of humour, and manages to stay entertaining and thoughtful throughout the experience, which is why I rank “District 9″ as my #1 film of 2009.
Moon
Moon is directed by Duncan Jones, and stars Sam Rockwell as the astronaut Sam Bell, who maintains a mining station on the far side of the moon. Charged with mining minerals for clean energy on earth, a japanese corporation sends astronauts on three-year contracts to carry out this work. Sam Bell is the latest to go, aided by the robot GERTY, brilliantly voiced by Kevin Spacey. Claiming that a film is unique is pretty far-fetched in a year like 2009, but “Moon” seems worthy of that description. Although it’s a modern-day science fiction film set in the near future, it also pays homage to recent classics like “Blade Runner” and “Alien.” Duncan Jones wrote the story but Nathan Parker adapted it to the screen. Parker’s script gives us a tour de force of Sam Rockwell’s considerable abilities. He doesn’t just carry the film ̶̶̶ “Moon” is pretty much a one-man show with Rockwell at the helm.
The cinematography, by the cinematographer Gary Shaw, adds to the sterile and eerie stillness of life on the moon with his copious use of still camera and slow tracking shots, only using hand-held when necessary. Nicolas Gaster’s editing is sure and steady, really driving the slow pace of Sam Bell’s three-year work assignment home. “Moon” brings us back to those sci-fi greats whose visuals were done in-camera, on set as opposed to being created by computers in post-production. Sam Bell’s unearthly home is a clean and comfortable one, yet it bears some signs of aging.
“Moon” is a modern day classic, a down and dirty science fiction film that challenges the viewer to live in the shoes of the protagonist stuck on the far side of the moon. It’s difficult to picture a better one in this role than Sam Rockwell or a more entertaining, and satisfying cinematic experience than “Moon”.
Taken
“Taken” is directed by Pierre Morel, a relative unknown. His only major directing duties has been on the french cult hit Banlieu 13. The story is written by the dynamic duo Luc Besson & Robert Mark Kamen, known for too many movies to count. “Taken” stars Liam Neeson as a former spy who uses his aquired skills to get back his daughter, who has been kidnapped during a trip to France.
Between the jaw-dropping action sequences was the subject matter of international trafficking, but don’t expect any daring social commentary. The action is excellent and Neeson is a very believable tough guy. “Taken” gives a real challenge to the “Bourne” movies but is perhaps better compared to Tony Scott’s “Man on Fire” from 2004. The break-neck pace never hampers the achievement of this movie, and it could easily have been longer.
93 minutes is gone in a blur of fighting, death, chasing and excitement, and we’re all left wondering why Liam Neeson’s never tried his hand at a role of this sort before.
Gran Torino
The premise: Disgruntled Korean War vet Walt Kowalski sets out to reform his neighbor, a young Hmong teenager, who tried to steal Kowalski’s prized possession: his 1972 Gran Torino. “Gran Torino”s Walt Kowalski may have similarities with another Eastwood character, Dirty Harry, and could be taken as an older version of Harry, but he is a unique and memorable character in his own right, and probably one of Eastwood’s finer performances, and one which gives him a chance to display both his dramatic and comedic talents.
The young supporting cast does not hold up compared to Eastwood, but this does not significantly hamper the film. Eastwood captures Kowalski perfectly. One can also view the film as a sort of deconstruction of Eastwood’s image. The film is actually surprisingly humorous, and Eastwood manages the shifts in tone brilliantly. The characterization is strong. One can always argue that Kowalski is just another bitter war vet, but Eastwood’s performance would prove otherwise.
As Clint Eastwood reaches his autumn years, he presents us with yet another performance which is nothing short of legendary. “Gran Torino” is on a smaller scale than many of his other films, but may be just as ambitious. It might just as well become an especially important part of Eastwood’s filmography.
Watchmen
Zack Snyder did what other directors has been struggling with for almost twenty years. He made a Watchmen adaptation. The almost literal reproduction of the graphic novel (barring the obvious alterations towards the end), page-by-page throughout the film, is an accomplishment in of itself, and it is probably the closest thing anyone could have gotten to put Alan Moore’s visionary graphic novel on the big screen.
Even with the changes, which was deemed necessary to cut away a lot of time-consuming backstory, Snyder has captured the essence of the book and given us a genuinely beautiful cinematic experience. And I for one cannot wait to get my hands on the definitive version on Bluray.
The Hurt Locker
“The Hurt Locker” depicts an US army bomb squad unit in a city where everyone is a potential enemy and every object could be a deadly bomb. The script is written by Mark Boal, who also penned the script for “In the Valley of Elah” with Paul Haggis. Boal was embedded with a bomb crew in Baghdad while he covered the Iraq war, and it is probably safe to assume that it has significantly influenced his writing. I’d say that this film is similar to the HBO miniseries adaptation of “Generation Kill” in both tone and presentation, managing to show how fucked up things are without tricks or gimmicks from director Kathryn Bigelow. She manages to bring the tension and the suspense of the streets of Iraq to us, the viewers.
This is not just a war film. It manages to stay unpolitical, and is in fact more of a character study, depicting a thoroughly disturbed individual’s life in hell. Jeremy Renner gives a powerful performance as an EOD officer addicted to the adrenaline stemming from his everyday near-death experiences. The rest of the cast gives a good impression and the short cameos by Guy Pearce and Ralph Finnes are brilliantly executed and feels both natural and unobtrusive.
From the great subversive screenplay through the vivid cinematography, masterful directing and perfectly paced editing, this is another great 2009 experience.
Inglourious Basterds
“Inglourious Basterds” is a World War II tale told only as Tarantino can. Brad Pitt is Lt. Aldo Raine, who leads the Basterds in Nazi-occupied France. Their goal is killin’ Nazi’s, as many as possible. Christoph Waltz portrays Colonel Hans Landa. He’s known as Hitler’s top jew hunter and goes about his business as ruthless as no other. The third sub-story consists of a young Jew who is hiding in Paris, Shoshanna Dreyfus. Shoshanna plots revenge on the Germans for what they did to her family. “Inglourious Basterds” contains three stories, intertwining and connecting with each other. If you know anything about Tarantino or his films, this is nothing new.
War has never been been so fun. The Basterds, are haunting and hilarious all at the same time. The dark comedy plays just as big a part as in any other Tarantino film. The tremendous performances of Mélanie Laurent and Christoph Waltz also lifts this film to another level, and the trademark Tarantino dialogues work perfectly with these performers. The story itself is riddled with historical inaccuracies, and it is obvious that Tarantino wanted to mess with peoples expectations of a war film. The cinematography gives us beautiful vibrant colours highlighting the film.
Quentin Tarantino is an entertainer. He managed to make WWII fun. “Inglourious Basterds” is a brilliantly entertaining film, it’s shocking, horrendous, dramatic, and funny at the same time. It is worth watching for Christoph Waltz performance alone, who for me was the big surprise of the film.
The Wrestler
Mickey Rourke portrays Randy ‘The Ram’ Robinson, a faded professional wrestler forced to retire, and who finds his quest for a new life outside the ring a dispiriting struggle. Directed by Darren Aronofsky, “The Wrestler” is much more than a film about wrestling. Randy is just a lonely guy whose life has disappeared in front of him. A man who has reached his middle-age with nothing to show for it. He has no wife, he has never been there for his daughter, and is stuck in a trailer park, sad and alone. Randy seems to develop a bond with a middle-aged stripper, played by Marisa Tomei. This one potential for a connection gives the aging wrestler some hope.
Aronofsky respects wrestlers and their world, and portrays the sport with dignity and realism. The style is real and honest, and could easily be counted as one of the top films of 2008. This, coupled with the great performances by the cast, especially from Rourke, leaves us with a great film.
Star Trek
Star Trek. When someone speaks this name, a collection of images, ideas, characters and phrases come to mind. Kirk, Spock, Picard, Data, Janeway, Seven of Nine; ideas like the prime directive; phrases like “Live long and Prosper”, “Good God Jim, I’m a doctor not a….”. I am not a Trekkie by a long shot, but I have a certain knowledge of the franchise. It has never deeply interested me, so I came to this film without any expectations one way or the other.
J.J. Abrams managed to reboot the franchise, and actually managed to interest me in the process. It might have been appealing to the science fiction nerd in me with its action scenes that easily rival anything in Transformers, and its breathtaking space battles. They have laid a solid foundation for a new series, with new life, a good cast and a director with some vision. If the first movie can be this good, my interest in further adventures have risen significantly.
It is grand, it is epic, and it is probably the only summer blockbuster on my list. The “Star Trek” of 2009 is certainly worth watching.
Drag Me to Hell
In “Drag Me to Hell” Alison Lohman plays Christine Brown, a loan officer ordered to evict an old woman from her home who finds herself the recipient of a supernatural curse, which turns her life into a living hell. For many, this film was a return to form for Sam Raimi, the director of the cult classics of the Evil Dead series.
It effortlessly takes a big dump on the majority of the rest of the horror movies of recent years. Entertaining and often cringe-worthy, “Drag Me to Hell” was probably never meant to be scary and realistic, which is why it works so well. The movie is entertainment and horror fun in it’s purest form. It has a basic yet innovative plot, a likable heroine, bucket-loads of bodily fluids, and contains more shocks than scares.
“Drag Me to Hell” provides us with a liberation from the hell of mainstream horror, and is one of my top 10 films of 2009.
