"An Education" movie review

Nominated for three Academy Awards (including Best Picture), An Education (PG-13) tells the coming of age story of a teenage girl (Carey Mulligan) in early 1960’s England. The movie, based on a memoir by Lynn Barber, is directed by Lone Scherfig with a screenplay brought to life by British author, Nick Hornby. Peter Sarsgaard, Alfred Molina, Dominic Cooper and Rosamund Pike costar in the film.

Andy: Writer Nick Hornby has never put his name on a movie that wasn’t good (High Fidelity, About a Boy), and while this isn’t the best movie he’s been associated with, it is easy to understand why it’s the first to earn him an Oscar nomination. An Education is a consistently engaging period piece, filled with characters that are realistic, entertaining, and flawed. Most impressive is that he’s taken a story line that should be entirely creepy (a man in his 30s courting a 16-year-old girl) and made it seem both plausible and almost acceptable.

Ryan: An Education is a solid film. With strong performances by the cast, including a breakthrough one by Mulligan and an insightful screenplay by Hornby, An Education soars above most movies of this variety. Although set around the suburbs of 1960’s London, the movie feels fresh with its strong characters that feel modern along with its examination of the timeless theme of young love.

Andy: The bottom line is that this movie doesn’t work without an authentic and charming performance from Carey Mulligan in the lead role. Aside from playing a teenager completely convincingly (Mulligan is 24), she carries the movie along, setting the tone of almost every scene. Her performance is well worth her Oscar nomination. She plays the character as an ordinary person, with subtlety and nuance and emotional depth. Unfortunately, the Academy doesn’t often go for subtlety and nuance, so she has little chance of winning the Oscar in spite of giving the most complete performance I saw from 2009.

Ryan: In a year of very few breakout performances it’s refreshing to see relative newcomer Carey Mulligan deliver a magnificent performance. Unfortunately her odds of winning are not good (actually 27-4) due to the Sandra Bullock and Meryl Streep forces but in my book she should be the favorite. For whatever reason The Academy shies away from rewarding performances that they might deem “light.” But make no mistake, Mulligan excels in creating an authentic character that is beautiful, smart and impressionable that moviegoers can also relate to.

Andy: An Education is a very good movie, but it has a couple of noticeable flaws. As amazingly slick as Peter Sarsgaard’s performance is, Hornby sends him out of the picture with haste, and the entire ending feels a bit rushed. In many ways the hasty conclusion belittles the gravity of what has happened to Mulligan’s character, and makes it a little harder to take some of the repercussions of what transpires in the movie seriously. Perhaps director Lone Scherfig’s goal wasn’t to seem “important,” but it was an odd tone to strike at the end of an otherwise well executed movie.

Ryan: An Education didn’t garner any other acting nominations but it’s difficult to understand how Peter Sarsgaard was ignored. Sarsgaard is one of the best character actors of his generation and his performance in this film ranks as one of his best efforts. Sarsgaard's worldly portrayal is the perfect foil to the innocence of Mulligan's character and the success of the movie hinges on their interaction. Needless to say both of them rise to the occasion.

An Education is a very good movie with some worthy performances. Final grade: B+.

Movie Review "Crazy Heart"

Still catching up on the award bait from last year, this week we’re taking a look at the Jeff Bridges vehicle, Crazy Heart (R). In the film Bridges plays a washed-up country and western music star (Bad Blake) who’s trying to recapture the fame of his past. Maggie Gyllenhaal costars as an aspiring journalist who falls in love with the troubled balladeer. Colin Farrell and Robert Duvall also costar in the film. Scott Cooper directs.



Ryan: Maybe it’s not completely fair but in some circles Crazy Heart is being sold as this year’s The Wrestler. Ultimately that’s a smart (The Wrestler was one of the best films of 2008) and accurate depiction (as it follows the template of that film of a “has-been” star trying to recapture fame while putting his life back together). But to me that’s where the similarities end. The Wrestler was a great film whereas Crazy Heart is simply a pretty good movie.



Andy: While certainly not as good as The Wrestler, Crazy Heart does work artistically in the same way that film did. It very convincingly shows Bridges’s Bad Blake as a decaying star on the verge of either an unlikely comeback or a predictable breakdown. There are two major differences here, with the first being that Blake is indeed bad. His character is much more despicable than The Wrestler, even if he does carry around a convincing amount of country charm. The second is that the focus on country music allows for some pretty solid old-style Nashville tunes, a significant advantage that makes up for some of the movie’s shortcomings.



Ryan: The biggest strength of the movie is the actual music used in the movie and the presentation of that music. There’s clearly an authenticity with regard to the music that enhances Crazy Heart. Not only do the actors (Bridges and Farrell) perform most of the music in the movie but the original songs in the film are smoothly integrated into the (fictional) story of Bad Blake. When it comes down to it, the theme song to Crazy Heart (written and performed by Ryan Bingham) will get nominated and probably (should) win an Oscar for Best Song.



Andy: Having solid original music is a must for a movie like this, and Crazy Heart does a great job. There are some country classics mixed in with the flawlessly executed originals, which were used with surprising restraint by director Scott Cooper. Ryan’s right about “Crazy Heart” being the obvious choice for the Oscar, but for my money “Fallin’ & Flyin’” is the essential track.



Ryan: Speaking of the Oscars, Jeff Bridges is a lock for an Oscar nod for Best Actor. He’s already won a Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild award so consequently there’s no question that he’s the odds on favorite to win his first Oscar. While it’s hard to believe that Bridges has never won an Oscar, I found his performance good but not transcendent (although much of that could be attributed to the made-for-TV-esque material that he's working with). No question, Bridges looks, acts and sounds like a genuine country music singer and he delivers a noteworthy performance. I’m just not sold on him being the front-runner when looking at his competition (Clooney, Firth and Renner). Ultimately, it was a good performance that lifted the movie to above average. Final grade: C+.



Andy: I found Bridges performance to be the most convincing I’ve seen this year. He makes your root for a character that should be unlikable, and carries a bunch of great songs around with him for good measure. The film itself may not be a revelation, but it is well executed on just about every level. If this is made-for-TV movie material, then I should start watching more made-for-TV movies. Bridges, Gyllenhaal, the music, and the directing are all top notch, earning Crazy Heart a B+.

MLB Lineup of the '90's

Last night on the MLB Network I was watching Prime 9. It’s a countdown show of various topics like—the best managers of all-time or the top clutch hitters of all-time. Needless to say I love watching this show.

Last night’s show was selecting the all ‘80’s team. It was as followed. . .

1B: Don Mattingly
2B: Ryne Sandburg
3B: Mike Schmdit
SS: Cal Ripken
LF: Rickey Henderson
CF: Dale Murphy
RF: Dwight Evans
C: Gary Carter
P: Jack Morris

Definitely not a bad team with 5 hall of famers (Sandburg, Schmidt, Carter, Ripken and Henderson). It’s hard to argue with Mattingly and Murphy as well. They had fantastic season in the ‘80’s (three MVP’s between them). Evans was a bit of surprise but when one looks at his production during that time frame than it becomes apparent that he was consistently a good player during the ‘80’s. Jack Morris gets this nod I think simply because he won the most games during the decade but he never won a Cy Young so I’m not convinced that he was the best choice. There was just no other obvious choice. The great pitchers of the ‘70’s (Ryan, Palmer, Seaver, Carlton) couldn’t carry their success throughout the whole decade and the next generation of pitchers (Gooden, Hershiser and then Clemens and Maddux) didn’t pitch enough in the decade to trump Morris’s production throughout the decade.

But anyway it got me thinking on what the team of the ‘90’s would be. Granted it’s an arbitrary timeframe and that does pose some questions that I’ll get into.
After some thought it’s as follows. . .

First Baseman

Frank Thomas
Average Season: .319 (BA)/ .440 (OBP)/ .575 (SLG)/ 103 (runs)/ 33 (HR)/ 112 (RBI) 169 OPS+
This was close-- with Jeff Bagwell involved in the discussion but Thomas gets the nod because his number are (slightly) better than Bagwell’s and he did win one more MVP award.

Second Baseman

Roberto Alomar
Average season: .308/ .382/ .400. . .95 (runs)/ 14 (HR)/ 73 (RBI)/ 31 (SB). 125 OPS+
This was a toss up with Biggio but I went with Alomar simply because he was better defensively.

Third Baseman

Chipper Jones
Average season: .301/ .394/ .529. . .108 (runs)/ 31 (HR)/ 105 (RBI)/ 17 (SB) 137 OPS+
Jones only played five seasons in the ‘90’s (he did win the ’99 MVP) but there really wasn’t much competition. Like I said earlier this is an arbitrary time frame and there just wasn’t anyone else to look at. So consequently playing five years is my cut off for a player’s qualifications to be considered.

Shortstop

Barry Larkin
Average Season: .303/ .388/ .466. . .83 (runs)/ 14 (HR)/ 64 (RBI)/ 27 (SB) 126 OPS+

Not much debate here. Larkin was hands down the best SS of any league throughout the duration of the ‘90’s.

Left Field

Barry Bonds
Average Season: .302/ .434/ .602. . .109 (runs)/ 36 (HR)/ 108 (RBI)/ 34 (SB) 179 OPS+
If you buy Game of Shadows than you know that Bonds didn’t start juicing until after the ’98 season so we have 90% of the decade in which Bonds was clean. And that’s the great tragedy of Bonds. . .he was already an elite player before he crossed the line.

Center Field

Ken Griffey Jr.
Average Season: .302/ .384/ .581. . .100 (runs)/ 38 (HR)/ 109 (RBI)/ 15 (SB) 152 OPS+
Not much of a debate here.

Right Field:

Larry Walker
Average Season: .313/ .390/ .571. . .88 (runs)/ 26 (HR)/ 85 (RBI)/ 18 (SB)/ 142 OPS+
Injuries affected his season averages but it’s still solid enough across the board (did win MVP in ’97). His power and defense bumps him over Tony Gwynn, who garnered strong consideration with a .344 batting average for the decade.

Catcher

Mike Piazza
Average Season: .330/ .393/ .580. . .87 (runs)/ 24 (HR)/ 109 (RBI) 157 OPS+.
Pudge was better defensively but Piazza’s offensive numbers dwarf him and the rest of the competition.

Pitcher

Greg Maddux
Average Season: 18-9/ 176 (K)/ 1.06 (WHIP)/ 2.54 (ERA)/ 162 ERA+

Pedro had an argument but Maddux threw 1,000+ more innings than Pedro and still had a lower ERA. Plus, winning 4 Cy Youngs in a row surely doesn’t hurt.

"A Single Man" movie review

With award season in full swing, we continue to look at the top performances of 2009. This week, we watched A Single Man (R). Colin Firth stars as a mourning English professor in 1950s California who is contemplating his life after the untimely death of his lover. Julianne Moore costars and American fashion designer Tom Ford makes is directorial debut.

Ryan: A Single Man is one of Hollywood's more fruitful offerings of the year. It's a complex character study involving a day in the life of one man's existential dilemma in trying to still find meaning in a world where his lover has unexpectedly died. Further complicating the situation is the character's sexuality and more specifically how he's unable to fully be himself in a society that is unwilling (or not ready) to accept an openly gay man. All-in-all A Single Man would be a worthy film to garner a Best Picture nomination and I think it's definitely a real possibility that it will.

Andy: A Single Man has flown under the radar, mostly (and deservedly) receiving credit for Colin Firth’s intricate and emotive performance. The film itself is also very well crafted, but it is hard not to shine the focus on Firth. Simply put, there is no film with out his tortured characterization of George. One of the most memorable aspects of Firth’s turn here is that for most of the film he is a man trying to hold it together in public, and we see him subtly losing for much of the film. Watching an actor walk that thin line over the course of the movie is truly a treat when it is done well, as it is here.

Ryan: Saying this film is a Colin Firth vehicle is slightly disingenuous to a movie of this ilk. Normally that term is used for more genre-specific films and not indie dramas. But if one thinks of that term in meaning a movie that best showcases the talent of a specific actor then by all mean this is a vehicle for Firth. Unquestionable he rises to the challenge. This is one of the best performances of the year and I will be shocked if he isn't rewarded with an Oscar nomination (which would be his first). He completely sells his performance of a desperate, conflicted man trying to overcome the tragic loss of his companion.

Andy: A Single Man is not the easiest film to watch, as it is very dramatic and intense. Julianne Moore’s character is able to provide a little light-hearted empathy, but for the most part, this is a movie about a cheerless time in one man’s life, and the film acts accordingly. As we see Firth’s character become more and more unraveled, the emotional depth becomes greater and greater. The very end of the film may strike an odd tone for some, but watching this character play out is fairly fascinating no matter how you feel about the conclusion.

Ryan: Although he's a successful fashion designer, Tom Ford is a rookie in the world of cinema. But make no mistake about it his debut is one of the year's more interesting films and he definitely demonstrates that he has a lot of promise as a filmmaker. Yes he's overly concerned with the look of the film (the furniture, the clothes, etc.) and there's no doubt that the style of the movie is very important to Ford. But this isn't a film that's all style. If anything the movie's style creates a thriving environment for the actors—especially Firth—to give all-around authentic performances.

Andy: There is no question that this movie establishes Ford was a very promising new director. At times his visual affect becomes a little too obvious. But the fact that a director is playing with lighting and composition is not necessarily a bad thing, it’s just not something I want to be noticing when I should be paying attention to the story. If Ford continues to make films and hones is craft, he could make some truly brilliant films.

A Single Man is a good movie highlighted by a great performance. Final grade: B+.

"Precious. . ." Movie Review

With our best-of-the-decade list concluded we are now going to concentrate on potential Oscar hopefuls. First up is the dramatic film Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire ( R). In the film an impoverished pregnant teenage girl (Gabourey “Gabby” Sidibe) seeks a way out of her dead end existence of living with her hateful mother (Mo'Nique) in Harlem in the late '80's. Paula Patton, Mariah Carey and Lenny Kravitz co-star in the film. Lee Daniels directs.

Ryan: On the heels of being nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Picture for a Drama and the fact that ten movies will be nominated for Best Picture, I feel that it is a safe bet that Precious will be nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. It's the kind of intense indie drama that voters like going for. From the performances to the authenticity of the film it's definitely an Oscar worthy picture. I wasn't taken away with it completely (like a lot of critics have been) but I do recognize that it is an excellent movie.

Andy: Precious is a misnamed, or at least ironically named film. The book upon which it is based is called Push, which is a more accurate representation of what the film does. It grabs hold of you and shoves you into situations you’d rather not see, but somehow know you must acknowledge. This movie unapologetically pushes its audience to confront some of the ugliest issues humans confront (incest, abuse, blind selfishness, and basic failings of our society). What’s remarkable is how magnetic the victimized hero, Clarisse Precious Jones, remains throughout all the hardship we see her endure.

Ryan: All the performances in Precious are top notch including those by relative acting newbies like Mariah Carey and Lenny Kravitz. But there's no question that the two leads in the movie, Sidibe and Mo'Nique completely dominate the film. Mo'Nique has the flashier role but both she and Sidibe give seminal performances. I'm inclined to think that Mo'Nique has a better chance at scoring an Oscar nod simply because her performance is so intensely dramatic. But it is also an effective (and haunting) performance and one that audiences will not soon forget.
Andy: At the heart of what makes Precious work so well is across the board great performances. Gabby Sidibe is an absolute revelation as the title character. In her acting debut she has embodied a character that is complex, mysterious, tragic, and a beautiful ray of humanity in a mostly horrible situation. As her mother and foil, Mo’Nique gives one of the most emotive and threatening performances I’ve ever seen. Both seem likely to get Oscar nominations, and I’d be surprised if Mo’Nique doesn’t end up with the Best Supporting Actress statue. Also giving impressive turns in support are Paula Patton and Mariah Carey.
Ryan: Lee Daniels, the director, does a masterful job in framing the story in a manner that conveys the weighty emotional themes of the movie. His accomplishment is even more remarkable considering how uneasy it is in watching several of the scenes in the movie. But it's also that passion of the story that almost goes too far. Needless so say the trials and tribulations of the lead character, Precious, are almost too much to buy. The unfathomable nature of her burden, while providing the hope of the film, teeters on the edge of absurdity. Nevertheless the film endures this minor shortcoming as one of the year's best.

Andy: Perhaps the biggest flaw with Precious is that it is so intense, from the very first minute until the last, that it is exhausting to watch. That is certainly what director Lee Daniels was attempting, and he achieved it soundly. The problem is that it is very difficult to watch. The fact that it does give an uplifting look at a character that should be completely lost scarcely makes up for the harsh action and implications of the story. However, it is easily one of the most well executed and important movies of the year, and a movie that I strongly recommend.

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire resonates long after viewing. Final grade: A-.

Best of the Decade, Part V

This week we conclude our look at the top films of the decade.

Andy: Number two on my list may come as a surprise to some people. 2003’s Lost in Translation (R) stars Bill Murray as an American actor filming a commercial in Japan. He meets a young American woman (Scarlett Johansson) who is experiencing similar emptiness and isolation. What really makes Lost in Translation stand up after repeated viewings is the way the director Sophia Coppola beautifully shoots the Tokyo landscape. Several of the scenes play out with the haunting soundtrack playing over the electric cityscape as the characters wrestle with their loneliness.

Murray gives what is likely the most powerful performance of his storied career. He brings disillusionment and mendacity to his performance that is still tempered with the decades of humor that are lying just underneath his every word, gesture, and look. For her part, Johansson also gives a performance that she’s spent the last seven years unsuccessfully trying to match. Her outward youthful innocence is betrayed by a much deeper restlessness that makes for a very complex performance. But the real star here is Coppola, who coaxes these amazing performances out while making the setting a crucial character in the story.

Ryan: Rounding in at number two on my list is Paul Thomas Anderson's There Will Be Blood (2000). The movie came in at number three on Andy's list and when he profiled the film he made several key points. One There Will Be Blood is a beautiful film. It's certainly a terrifying beauty but there's no doubt that from a purely aesthetic standpoint There Will Be Blood is one of the most artistically shot films of the decade. Anderson constructs every scene like it's the film's most important scene and that attention to detail sets his movie's apart. Anderson's body of work is top notch but There Will Be Blood clearly shows him at the top of his game.

A second point that Andy alluded to is that There Will Be Blood “does not have much fun about it.” It's not that it's a difficult to film to watch or grasp. But it's a movie with a stark view of human nature. It's not a good-guy versus a bad- guy type film. It's more of a bad guy versus an even worse guy. Paul Dano's character, Eli Sunday is a religious hypocrite and Daniel Day Lewis character, Daniel Plainview, has been seduced by greed. When these two characters interact the results are far from pleasant. Let's just say that the title of the movie is aptly put.

It's impossible to talk about this movie without paying due respect to Daniel Day Lewis. He justifiably earned an Oscar for his performance and I would go even further and argue that it's the best performance of the decade. The power of the performance is that one is still captivated with his character even though he's clearly on a downward spiral into an emotional emptiness. One can't take his eyes off of him. It's a transcendent performance that makes There Will Be Blood a truly memorable film.

Andy: My number one movie of the decade is 2004’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (R). One thing that propels this movie to the top of my list is the fact that I have probably seen this movie four times in the past six years, and it continues to get better with each viewing. The complex plot structure, written by Charlie Kaufman, the best screenwriter of the decade, is a key element of the movie’s success. A couple (Jim Cary and Kate Winslet) who have their memories erased after a bad break up. We see the love story in reverse, as the two try to piece together the shadow of memories that exist.

Part of what makes it work is the superb supporting cast that includes Tom Wilkenson, Mark Ruffalo, Kirsten Dunst, and Elijah Wood. All put in great performances, but the real stars here are the leads. Jim Cary has always been vastly underrated as a serious actor, and this is the best performance he’s ever given. Not to be outdone, the best actress of the decade, Kate Winslet, absolutely owns her performance. Director Michael Gondry pieces it all together in a movie that is entertaining, uplifting, tragic, and interesting all at once. For my money, it’s the closest this decade came to movie perfection.

Ryan: In this modern media age when one is a movie lover one can't help but to get geared up for new releases. It's almost always the case that one goes into just about every movie with a certain set of expectations. Unfortunately more times than not those expectations are not entirely met. But every so often a movie meets those expectations and sometimes--in those rare instances--a film will even surpass those conceptualized notions. And when that happens one knows that they have a true gem on their hands. With that said, my number one film of the decade is Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight (2008).

This revelation might not surprise some people. Being a life-long Batman fan certainly does call into question my objectivity. But I feel confident--as a fan and as a critic--to label The Dark Knight as the film of the decade. Nolan's take on Batman (and that includes Batman Begins as well) is the definitive cinematic take of the Caped Crusader. As a Batman aficionado I can positively say that those movies brought to life in the most authentic manner the Batman mythos.

But I can also take a step back from fandom and see why The Dark Knight became such a cultural phenomenon. Not only is it an extremely well made film that is highlighted by the iconic performance of Heath Ledger (as the Joker) but it captured the zeitgeist of the nation upon it's release in the summer of 2008. The themes in The Dark Knight of good versus evil is as timeless as it gets but there was something so contemporary with it's manifestation of the battle that it instinctively struck the right chord with moviegoers. In an uncertain time while facing an unexplainable evil, an incorruptible yet ruthless hero was needed. Batman personified the type of hero that audiences were looking for. In this decade comic book movies dominated cineplexes but the relevant escapism of The Dark Knight propelled it to top of my list.

Now that our lists are complete, we will begin to look at this year’s Oscar hopefuls starting next week.

Best of the Decade, part IV

This week we move one step closer to our top films of the decade as we check in with our numbers four and three movies.

Ryan: Coming in at number four on my list is Cameron Crowe's Almost Famous (2000) (It was number seven on Andy's list). The semi-autobiographical tale details a young rock journalist profiling (the fictitious) band Stillwater in the 1970's. The film stars Patrick Fugit, Kate Hudson, Billy Cruddup and Jason Lee.

For me the success or failure of most movies depend on this simple maxim—does the film work? In my view Almost Famous is a prime textbook example of when all areas of the filmmaking process work to create a memorable film. From the direction, to the screenwriting, to the acting, to the tone of the film Almost Famous is simply a movie that works. While it's a film of technical brilliance it's also one of those movies that is pure joy to watch over-and-over as well. It's a movie that never gets old watching and every repeated viewing reveals a new wrinkle to the coming-of-age story.

Almost Famous also resonates as a memorable movie for those moviegoers that are music lovers as well. Not only does it document the mid 70's music scene but it parallels the growth and maturity of a rock band with that of a teenage music reporter all the while set to memorable musically inspired scenes. Even the songs that were strictly written for the film (by Peter Frampton, Crowe and his wife, Nancy Wilson) help to solidify the credibility of the movie. There definitely was a concerted effort by Crowe and his company to make an authentic film—not just from a narrative standpoint—but from an emotional standpoint as well.

Andy: My number four is the John Cusack hipster rom-com High Fidelity (Ryan’s number eight). Released back in 2000 just three months into the decade, High Fidelity tapped an indie-mainstream crossover audience that would help carry many films in the subsequent years.

Two things really make this film work. One is the amazing soundtrack, which adequately bounces between cool and comfortable in a way that is a must for a movie that takes place largely inside an independent record store. The other is the superb performance from an ensemble cast that includes great turns by Jack Black, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Joan Cusack, and Tim Robbins among others. Heading the list of performances is John Cusack, giving the best in his well documented career. His self-referential, speaking into the camera narration could have ruined the movie. Instead, it carries the audience along through an ugly break-up that is somehow funny and awkward at the same time. It is not flashy, and it is not grand, but High Fidelity is as near to flawless as date movies got in the past ten years.

Ryan: Number three on my list is another film that Andy included on his list (at number six). Up (2009) tells the fantastic story of an amazing journey involving two polar opposite individuals—78-year-old widow Carl Frederickson and Russel an 8 year-old aspiring Wilderness Explorer.
Initially Up looked like the film that might derail Pixar's wildly successful (both critically and commercially) ascending track record. The simplicity of the title and of the initial look of the movie just didn't spark my interest. But sometimes it's those simple concepts that are executed in beautiful manner that make for the most lasting impact. Up is a wonderful film that's emotionally rich both from a comedic and dramatic standpoint. In fact the montage scene at the beginning of the movie is the most emotionally textured scene of the decade and it's executed in a flawless manner.

I feel very comfortable having Up as three on my list and it resides there on it's own merit but I would be remiss if I didn't find myself looking at that high ranking as a symbol for Pixar's dominance of the decade. Pixar's movies have always been good but in this decade they progressively became great (Finding Nemo and The Incredibles) to artistic works of art (Ratatouille, WALL-E and Up). I only had one Pixar film on my list but there's no question that Ratatouille and WALL-E were knocking at the door. I don't think there's any grand secret to Pixar's success. There will always be a market for great storytelling and Pixar does it better than anyone else in the business.

Andy: Coming in at number three on my list is 2008’s There Will Be Blood. I remember being overwhelmed at the intensity of the movie when I first saw it, with the violent twists, jarring score, and flash-forward ending leaving me almost as unsettled as I was impressed. But upon a second viewing, There Will Be Blood proves to be complex, terrifying, and beautiful. Daniel Day-Lewis gives one of the performances of the decade as Daniel Plainview, a California oil man who will stop at nothing in order to succeed. With each success we see Plainview grow a little more evil. And to watch Day-Lewis make those leaps is to watch an actor at the peak of his craft.
There Will Be Blood is essentially a character study, but it does so much more than follow the life of one man. It can be read as an allegory foreshadowing the darkest side of capitalism in the 20th century, particularly in the field of fossil fuels. It is also technically appealing, with some of the most beautifully crafted shots of the decade, made all the more intriguing by the menacing story they are telling. Much credit goes to P.T. Anderson, whose only other movie of the decade, Punch Drunk Love, is widely underappreciated. There Will Be Blood does not have much fun about it, but it is movie making at just about the highest level that anyone reached this decade, and it is easy to imagine that time will only make it more poignant.



Next week we will finish off our decade review with our number two and number one movies.