Aaron Katz is a NCSA grad. He has written and directed Dance Party, USA, Quiet City, which was nominated for an Independent Spirit award, and Cold Weather which is premiering at South By Southwest in March. www.coldweatherthemovie.com/ That's the website.

Here are both parts of the interview.

As I was preparing my list for this series of articles we are doing here at Laser Crab, I realized something. I quickly put together my best of the ‘00’s decade list. Not because the works stood out as so singularly brilliant, but because there were only so many movies that even deserved consideration. Then, I began to prepare my top of the 90’s list (which can be found at the bottom of the article), and I was rushed with titles. The top four stood out because they are all in my top twenty of all time. And I realized something that I felt compelled to notify everyone of: contrary to popular belief, the 90’s were an awesome decade for movies. Awesome. Second only to the 70’s.  

First you might be thinking. “You’re just biased because you grew up during the ‘90’s and have a personal attachment to the movies from that period.” Yes, I did grow up during the 90’s. But, I didn’t have my personal movie revolution until around 2002. I saw none of the movies in my top ten from the ’90’s in the theater. In fact, the only “great” movies I saw during the ‘90’s in the theater were Babe and The Sixth Sense. That’s it. When the 90’s came to a close, I was in 8^th grade and if you would have asked me what the best movies of the decade were I would have said Independence Day or Saving Private Ryan.¹ And, under the incorrect assumption that the 90’s sucked, when my movie awakening happened, I watched anything but movies from the 90’s. I watched mostly black and white foreign films first. Godard, Kurosawa, Bergman. Then moved on to early American directors: Wilder, Ford, Hawks, Houston, Hitchcock, Welles. It wasn’t really until college that I saw most of the movies on my current list. So, I have no need to nostalgize² the 90’s movie scene. Because, I wasn’t a part of it.  

The main reason the 1990’s were a spectacular decade is the sheer amount of talented directors working at the top of their game and, for the most part, with relative creative freedom not seen since the ’70’s. 

The independent scene at the time resembled what will probably be the closest we will ever get to doing what the studio system did during the 70’s. It brought us an unprecedented group of new talented directors: Paul Thomas Anderson (Hard Eight, Boogie Nights, Magnolia), Quentin Tararantino (Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown), Steve Soderbergh (Schizopolis, Out of Sight, The Limey), Wes Anderson (Bottle Rocket, Rushmore), Richard Linklater (Slacker, Before Sunrise, Dazed  and Confused), Gus Van Sant (My Own Private Idaho, Only Cowgirls Get the Blues, Good Will Hunting) Alexander Payne (Citizen Ruth, Election), Sofia Coppola (Virgin Suicides), David O. Russell (Spanking the Monkey, Flirting with Disaster, Three Kings), the Coen Brothers (I know they’ve been around since before the 90’s but they operated largely in the independent system till Fargo).  

There was a fair influx of international talent: Jean-Pierre Juentet, Wong Kar-Wai, Lars Von Trier, Jane Champion, Jim Sheridan, Danny Boyle, Alfonso Cuaron and Pedro Almodovar. 

Many talented established directors were given freedom to create with relative ease, frequency, and freedom throughout the decade: Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen, Robert Altman, Tim Burton, Michael Mann, Mike Nichols, Robert Redford, Milos Foreman, Clint Eastwood. (I’m including him begrudgingly to help my point. But, I can’t wait to show my kid Unforgiven in 2031 and ask him what he thinks and have him say, “It sucked. It’s just every stereotype and cliché rolled into one movie with a heavy-handed score. Actually strike that dad. Heavy-handed everything. Who would ever like that crap.” And then I’ll tell him “People called Clint Eastwood a great filmmaker in the 90’s and 2000’s” He’ll reply, “That’s fucking dumb.” I’ll reply, “Watch your language Huckleberry.”³ Huckleberry will say “Sorry dad. Can we watch Magnolia? It’s Paul Thomas Anderson best movie. The only reason people say There Will Be Blood is his best film is because they wanted to be a part of something great. Actually that was an entire problem for the 2000’s it appears, dad. Everyone wanted so desperately to live when great things were happening they went adjective crazy over everything that happened: sports, books, music, TV. Everyone lost objectivity and just started calling everything great and failed to observe flaws. I mean, The Dark Knight’s not really good”⁴ And then I’ll say, “I’ve brainwashed you well, Huckleberry”) 

And then there was Spike Jonze and David Fincher.⁵ 

The 90’s probably gave us the best year for movies ever in 1999. Don’t believe me? I’m going to make a list of movies that came out that year. Here I go: Being John Malkovich, Magnolia, Sweet and Lowdown, The Insider, Three Kings, Election, The Matrix, The Sixth Sense, American Movie, Fight Club, American Beauty, The Iron Giant, Office Space, American Pie, All About My Mother, Jesus’ Son, My Best Fiend, South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut, Boys Don’t Cry, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Bring Out Your Dead, Toy Story 2, The Blair Witch Project, Run Lola Run, Sleepy Hollow, Eyes Wide Shut, Virgin Suicides, The Limey, Go, The Straight Story, and Deuece Bigalow.^6,7 

The B movies were even of higher quality in 1999: 10 Things I Hate About You (Actually pretty good), Galaxy Quest (Surprisingly, actually pretty good), Notting Hill (So good I could have included it on the list above, but didn’t because I have a sweet spot for Hugh Grant. It’s called my penis)⁸ Austin Powers: The Spy who Shagged Me (Maybe better than the first), She’s All That (Not one of my favorites, but lots of people like it), Varsity Blues (Should be mentioned if only because it might have the most fun line to quote ever “I don’t want your life.” Say it in the accent and the same cadence and you’ll smile, trust me)⁹ and Dick (very good).¹⁰ 

Let’s just say if the Internet had existed to the extent that it does today, there would have been several bloggers dying of exhaustion from writing about all the awesome stuff that was out at the movies all year long.  

The 90’s was a great time to be a moviegoer. There was a lot of crap. A lot of crap. But, there was a lot of really amazing filmmaking. It was just harder to find because there was no Internet. Now, there is actually a lot more crap being made. A lot more.¹¹ It’s just easier to find the good stuff. Because of that, we hear about the good stuff going on more now than we used to. It appears as if there is more good stuff going on because we are hearing about it as it happens. Things used to take word of mouth and traded VHS tapes before they gained credibility. Movies, bands, books would take years to grow their audience. That doesn’t happen any more with the rapid communication we have. We live in a bizarre world. If I find out one of my friends, even ones that live on the other side of the country, has seen a movie or read a book or heard a band and I haven’t heard about it for a couple of weeks I become shocked. “I didn’t know you saw Inglourious Basterds? When did you see it?” “A couple weeks ago? How have we not talked about this yet?” 

Also, we haven’t adjusted our understanding of how to filter the internet buzz. It used to be there were only a couple of microphones. TV, newspaper, magazines, radio, etc. The access to which was extremely limited. And the people controlled those microphones very well. You may disagree, but it used to be before people got up to a microphone most times they had to go through some sort of screening process. Now, everyone has a microphone. Everyone. As a culture we haven’t adjusted to this fact. We still treat everyone who has a microphone as a qualified voice.¹² We consciously know “don’t trust what you hear on the TV, radio, newspaper, and especially the internet because it can be said by anyone.” But, as part of human nature, once we absorb a piece of information we forget the source and just remember the information. This is how almost all misinformation is started. You hear something from a wacko and two weeks later you hear it again and try to remember where it came from and you assume this information came from a reputable source, why else would it be in your head? You wouldn’t remember what some wacko said. Now when one person says “Wall-E is the best Pixar film ever!”¹³ from someone’s Facebook status, soon all you remember is “Wall-E is the best Pixar film ever!” not the source. This whole decade has been run by hype of movies and not quality. This is how we lost objectivity. We wanted to be a part of it. We were seeing this thing happen on the internet. On blogs, Facebook walls, statuses, and newspaper articles, and we wanted to be a part of experiencing this awesome thing with our friends. We wanted to step up to the microphone and say “The Departed was Scorsese’s best movie, guys on internet! Jack was awesome!”¹⁴ There have been more movies that were hailed as “amazing” “masterpieces” “you gotta see it!”  

But, the truth is the 2000’s were a very bad decade for movies. If I were to make a top three list of the last two decades, I would probably only include one, maybe two movies from this decade. You do one yourself. I’ll wait. You probably like the ‘90’s more than you realized but there wasn’t a technology device that allowed you to tell essentially the whole world how much you thought 300 was “bad ass.”¹⁵  With pretty much all of the directors that hit their strides in the 90’s taking a breather and making lesser movies that “we” called the “best” and “masterpieces”,¹⁶ we clamored over any new “independent” talent like they we’re the second coming of Paul Thomas Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, Steven Soderbergh, or Wes Anderson.¹⁷ Mostly because we missed the boat to really appreciate those filmmakers the first go round. I can’t wait until twenty years from now when we as a culture have adjusted to the speed and depth of our access to information and start to weed out what was good from what was bad on our own. And realize a blog represents one person’s opinion not the popular zeitgeist.¹⁸ It is then I hope that we’ll realize the 1990’s was a truly amazing decade for movies.¹⁹ 

Here finally is my top ten list of the 1990’s:

1    Pulp Fiction
2    Being John Malcovich
3    Magnolia
4    Three Kings
5    Boogie Nights
6    Fargo
7    When We Were Kings
8    Jackie Brown
9    Schindler's List
10    Chungking Express²⁰   

¹Even though I hadn’t seen it. But, I was stupid back then and worked under the assumption that movie business now depends on with every fiber of its being “If people say it's great it has to be great even if I don’t like it or haven't seen it. So my opinion will be that it is great.” That explains almost ever movie during the 2000’s that is collectively called great.
²It should be a word. All of Facebook is a nostalgizer machine.
³I’ve always wanted to call my kid Huckleberry. It probably won’t happen, because most girls I tell about this think it’s a stupid name.
⁴Don’t get mad at me. It’s Huckleberry saying it.
⁵I don’t know really where to put them. Both of their first films where full-blown studio productions.
⁶I don’t want to get comment posts. I was joking. I’ll still get one from a lazy reader I bet. Since that person will never read this footnote and will go ahead and insult him You suck. I know not that great of an insult but I’m not going to waste my A game on an insult directed to a person that won’t even read it.
⁷Also The Thin Red Line technically came out in 1998, so save it.
⁸Wait? Did I just write that out loud?
⁹I…don’t want…your life.
¹⁰If you’re wondering where The Green Mile is I’ll let you in a on a secret: it sucks.
¹¹In 1990 there were 197 movies released in the USA. 1999: 436, 2005: 594, 2009 (Hold on to your butts): 1,148. Figures gathered from the-numbers.com
¹²This effect has even leaked to news networks. They have reduced their standards for who can talk for certain groups of people and who can talk about certain topics and will call anyone an "expert" to try and keep up with the Internet.
¹³Not only is Wall-E not one of the best Pixar films ever, it is probably one of the worst.
¹⁴I saw this movie with friends and was so furious afterwards that it has sort of become infamous. I knew that this movie would be praised as Scorsese’s best and he would win an Oscar for it. This is wrong. Jack is terrible. The rat is terrible. Drop Kick Murphy’s is terrible. It is probably the most frustrating movie of this decade. Leo is brilliant. There are even moments of truly inspired filmmaking by Scorsese that he hadn’t demonstrated the ability to achieve since probably Casino. They are then directly followed by some of his worst filmmaking achievements. The coke scene, any frame Jack is in, and the stupid mother fucking rat.
¹⁵If you are ever commenting on a movie and say that it’s just so “bad ass” or “kick ass” I will officially never take anything you say about movies seriously again. Just being honest. Don’t look at me. You’re the dumb ass.
¹⁶The most obvious examples: No Country for Old Men, The Departed, Slumdog Millionaire, Gladiator, Sideways. And, any performance by Sean Penn, Denzel Washington, or Russell Crowe.
¹⁷Again the most obvious examples: Jason Reitman, Jared Hess, Christopher Nolan and Little Miss Sunshine.
¹⁸I’m aware of the irony.
¹⁹And the 00’s was the second worst decade of movies. Finishing just ahead of the 80’s. I had to fit one more shot in.
²⁰Movies it hurts not to include: Sweet and Lowndown, The Limey, Rushmore, Jurassic Park, Good Will Hunting, Goodfellas.

1            Pulp Fiction
2            Schindler’s List
3            The Matrix
4            Saving Private Ryan
5            The Thin Red Line
6            Bottle Rocket
7            Chungking Express
8            Ed Wood
9            The Insider
10          The Big Lebowski

 Honorable Mentions: Breaking the Waves, the Three Colors Trilogy, Boogie Nights, Fallen Angels

 

 Discuss

These films have, for various reasons, not seen the recognition among the general populace that they deserve, despite having moderate acclaim or festival appearances and being quite excellent.  You should watch them.  Soon.

Click the links to see clips or trailers.

This picked up the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language film, but has been seemingly ignored otherwise, as far as I can tell.  On top well-acted and well-photographed, its also extraordinarily relevant and one of the only of the only films made from the unique perspective of a pair of forced terrorists.  Following two would-be suicide bombers, it is intelligent and intense throughout.

The Experiment

A film based on the Stanford Prison Experiment by the guy who made Downfall.  For those who don't know, the Stanford Prison Experiment involved a couple dozen people, some made into prisoners and others into guards.  Very quickly, things escalated out-of-control and this film is no different. Isn’t that enough?

Eureka

A film that has surely made someone’s top ten of the decade, but which may not even have US distribution, which is unthinkable.  Following the only three survivors of a bus hijacking gone awry, it is as meditative and bizarre as any great Japanese film. It's well worth hunting down.

Taxidermia

Alternating between the absurd, grotesque, and just downright disgusting, this Hungarian curiosity follows three generations of an increasingly disturbed family. Impossible to describe in a way that isn't repulsive, I'll just have to say watch it. You’ll definitely see something you haven’t seen before.

The Beat that My Heart Skipped

Gangsters, concert pianists, and France. What more do you need to know?  Audiard is definitely going to be an increasingly well-known name in the next decade. 

Save the Green Planet!

Existing somewhere between obscurity and being the cult film with the smallest cult ever, Planet! is one strange ride.  A complete box office failure in South Korea, this one focuses on a possibly disturbed young man who kidnaps an business executive he feels is alien spy.  Being the directors only film to this point hasn't helped it gain an audience.  Hmm...  You should probably just look it up.

12:08, East of Bucharest

Did their small town revolt before or after the fall of Ceausescu? This is the subject of a local talk show in Romania.  Was the leader of the revolution drunk?  Was he even there? Had the dictator already stepped down? What does the local Chinese man have to say? Watch and find out.

Tokyo!

Three films, two by famous directors, each with their own take on the title metropolis somehow slipped under the radar given the difficulty of marketing and distributing an Asian-themed omnibus in the States.  Shaking Tokyo is perhaps the best short film of the decade and Michel Gondry's portion is definitely worth a look.  You can give the middle film the slip, as it’s appropriately titled Merde.

The Princess and the Warrior

Did you see Run, Lola, Run? Not that great, huh?  Pretty much a remake of Kieslowski's Blind Chance, but with too much techno. Didn't see that one either? Well, this isn't a list of forgotten films of the 80's, so tough luck. Maybe you should just watch this one, instead.

The Band’s Visit

Disqualified from the foreign language Oscar race for having too much English, it is a simple, quietly comedic tale of a misplaced Egyptian police band.  Subtle, heartwarming, intelligent.  But, somehow the band didn't make any noise.

All the Real Girls
If I were to make a best movies of the decade list, this would be the only movie from this list on it. I don’t know anyone who has seen this movie that says it isn’t the best movie about young heartbreak. Anytime a movie that isn’t in the popular zeitgeist and many people walk away with the same conclusion you know something unique is going on. David Gordon Green might be the most forgotten director of this decade, too. He has made two brilliant movies: All the Real Girls and George Washington. Two great movies: Snow Angels and Pineapple Express (yes it is great) and one more interesting than good movie: Undertow. And yet, so far his work hasn’t appeared on any lists of the decade. But, I digress.

The degree of difficulty of this movie is off the charts. A movie about young heartbreak. It’s something everyone goes through and feels is extremely important and unique like it hasn’t happened to anyone else ever to the individual at the time but, in actuality, is boring to everyone else because in fact everyone has gone through the exact same thing and in retrospect they realize they were just a peddling mess of pathetic-ness that was annoying all of their friends. And this movie nails that experience.

It makes you remember that feeling of absolute loss. That soul crushing feeling that can only happen when you let someone in and they decide to leave. And it does it without being nostalgic or trite. It is one of the few movies that actually capture what makes you fall in love with a girl. Like the fact that she farts in front of you. Or she still keeps her watch on when you are having sex. But, one reason it succeeds is because it doesn’t shy away from the awkwardness or the pathetic-ness. If you get annoyed by Paul Schneider’s character in this movie, that’s a valid feeling and one I don’t think is a mistake or a fault of the movie but, rather an honest portrayal of people who are heartbroken. Think about your last good friend who got broken up with. For the first two weeks you felt bad for him and then another two weeks go by and you just want to fucking strangle them. It’s true. Here is the first scene of the movie.

 Primer
Primer is probably the best work of science fiction to come out this decade. It’s surprisingly original with a story that you thought had been beaten to death and done everyway possible: time travel. It’s like a Neo-realist science fiction. The low-budgetness of the movie helps sell the real world of the characters. If the movie had a couple of million dollars instead of 16,000 it wouldn’t have the same feel. The movie was a sensation at Sundance when it came out. It won a special grand jury award. It became a semi-legend that year. It was the first DIY movie that really is a movie. (Clerks sucks, sorry)

The movie is oddly reinventing. You only ever understand half of what is going on. I’ve seen it probably six times and each time I watch I think I’ll figure it all out and then of course I finish it just as lost. But, the genius of the movie is one doesn’t actually have to understand everything to understand everything. You know enough that you’re never lost and don’t know enough that it’s exciting every time you watch. It covers so much in its short 77 minutes. A movie should get extra points for being shorter than the series finale of The Wire. Here is the trailer.

Waltz With Bashir
This is the most perplexing title on the list. I don’t understand why this movie is not more acclaimed than it is. It seems to have already been forgotten. It’s an animated documentary about the Lebanon War. Right there you are already interested in seeing this movie. But, it’s a film about perspective and memories and dreams. It’s one of the most truly original and unique films that came out this decade and no one seems to care. Maybe it’s not pretentious enough or boring enough or overtly “you should feel sad” enough to make people think they should think it’s important. But, it is. Here is the trailer.

Junebug
Again this movie fails to be talked about because it lacks flash and quirks. When the movie was released, it wasn’t lacking critical support. Amy Adams was nominated for an Oscar. There was an article in the New York Times pleading for Angus McGlachuagh to get a Screenplay nomination. He didn’t. Again, this movie is being forgotten, because the popular world was never told that it should be a movie to be remembered. Oh, and it isn’t pretentious enough or bad enough for English majors or people who think they are Holden Caulfield but really are just lazy to claim it is brilliant just to make everyone else hate them. You don’t know who you are but everyone else does. Anyway, here's the opening.

 Me You and Every One We Know
Again this movie got a lot of attention when it was released. It won a Special Grand Jury Award at Sundance and made several critics top ten lists. But, it seems to have been forgotten. I have only seen this movie twice. Once when it came out and the second time when I watched it for this article. I already had it on this list and, when I watched it the second time, it was better than I remembered it being. The first time I watched it, I just paid attention to how bizarre it was and found it charming. But, on the second watching I was surprised to find that there is a very compelling story at the heart of the movie. It’s probably one of the truly unique movies from the last decade. Here is one of the first great scene of the movie.

The Painted Veil
The Painted Veil was released in 2006 and no one cared. It won a Golden Globe for best score and grossed about $8 million dollars. I re-watched this film for this article; it was only the second time I had seen it and it thoroughly impressed me again. It’s just a very good, smart, mature movie. Naomi Campbell and Edward Norton are fantastic. It doesn’t do anything new or really that original but is just good storytelling. Which is just as big of a compliment.

The Rules of Attraction
This movie got panned in the reviews. But, it’s great. Yes, there are moments of really bad filmmaking. The whole Rubert sub-plot (when watching the movie I normal skip those scenes), most of the moving backwards scenes… But, films are not the sums of their parts. The movie style is pretty brilliant- my good friend Foster has coined the perfect expression for its style, “Its style is as self-destructive as its characters.” The movie perfectly captures what college is like: crazy and fun and horribly depressing. The movie, smartly, only skirts at the heart of what its about. Just like the characters are too afraid to really look at themselves objectively. There are several scenes in this movie that I would put on the best moments of filmmaking from the past decade. So many, in fact, that it is hard for me to chose which clip to show you but I guess it has to be this one.

Bonus points for this awesome poster.

Superman Returns

Bryan Singer left the X-Men franchise to relaunch the Superman franchise. There were all sorts of talk by Singer that this was his dream come true, to make a Superman movie. Kevin Spacey playing Lex Luthor, an insane budget- it seemed all too good. But, the movie turned out rather pedestrian. Besides the first real action scene where Superman prevents the airplane from crashing, which is brilliant, the movie is fairly uninteresting. It was one of those movies that I tried to talk myself into liking more, but never fully got there. You can’t blame Singer too much though. Superman is a fairly boring character really.

Funny People

Knocked Up had better dramatic scenes in it than almost any “independent” drama to come out in the last five years. Needless to say, I was prepared to have my mind blown when I heard about the idea and the cast: Adam Sandler, Eric Bana, the RZA, Jason Schwartzman. I was ready for an Altman movie with more dick jokes. Instead I got Spanglish with more dick jokes. The first half of the movie is great and I’m glad that Apatow appears to be trying to grow, but I wanted this movie to be great probably more than anything that came out this decade that wasn’t.

The Good German

First thing we should get out of the way- I have a man-crush on Steven Soderbergh. A very large man-crush. I should probably write a very long indepth article of how much my man crush is and why. I don’t think you realize how awesome Soderbergh is.

The Good German is a film noir set after the end of World War II in Germany. Starring George Clooney, Cate Beckinsale, and Tobey Maguire. Soderbergh only used film equipment that was available to people in the 1940’s and tried to copy the look as much as possible. The first trailer was awesome. Unfortunately, the movie was just an interesting experiment and not a great movie. You should still see it though.

Leatherheads

George Clooney’s first two movies were Confessions of a Dangerous Mind and Good Night, and Good Luck. He earned some good faith. Leatherheads was a script that had been bouncing around for years, with several different directors and screenwriters working on it at different times. At best it sounded like it should have been fun. It was mildly fun at best. Like an episode of Two and a Half Men.

The Departed

This movie broke my heart. It really did. I had convinced myself it was going to be great. There was no way it couldn’t have been, really. Matt Damon, Mark Wahlberg, Leonardo DiCaprio, Alec Baldwin, Martin Sheen, Ray Winstone and Jack Nicholson. No way is that movie not great.

Leonardo DiCaprio delivers probably one of the best performances of the decade; Jack delivers one of the worst. There are moments of legitimate excitement and then Jack shows up with a dildo. And then there’s that stupid fucking rat. And, then there’s every scene Jack is in. This movie is barely good. People…

There Will Be Blood

I rewatched this movie recently and it is not as good as I even remembered. The first hour is really good. Not great, really good. And then, the brother shows up and announces, “Hi, I’m nothing interesting. Just a plot device. PTA is for the first time in his career taking the easy road with me. How’s it going?” The movie gets clunky and truncated. Then there’s the very bad last scene that shows absolutely no restraint from anyone involved.

This movie is the definition of a lesser work.

Fast Food Nation

The book is probably my favorite non-fiction book of all-time. And, it sounded like it could have been good. Richard Linklater can be a great director. Yeah, this could be good. I left the theater at one point, I was so anger at how big of a waste of an opportunity this movie was.

The Lovely Bones

Peter Jackson makes a really bad movie. One that is mind bogglingly cheesy. Very poorly directed. Appears to never really have gotten a handle on what type of movie he was making or what story he wanted to tell. It feels like a half-baked movie.

Moneyball

This movie didn’t get made and that’s why it’s a disappointment. The book is amazing. It’s all about stats and investigating. In my head, it’s like All the President’s Men with baseball. Unfortunately, the studio pulled the plug. To be honest, it was probably the right decision- the budget was around 60 million, and it probably would have made ten dollars at the box office.

Avatar

Every one of us saw clips of Avatar before it came out and had nothing but almost orgasmic things to say about it. Steven Soderbergh’s quote was “I’ve seen some crazy shit before but holy shit.”

The 3D is revolutionary; the special effects are pretty great. But, there is no really great action set piece. The script was written with a handful of depleted uranium. It’s like, if they revealed the world’s tallest building and, yeah, it’s really tall, that’s amazing, but it looks like shit.

What if the some of the films that you thought were going to be fantastic, but ended up as huge disappointments, were actually great?  Here, I’m presenting very short reviews for the films that let me down the most over the past decade.  Well, these are the reviews that I wish I could have written.  Or, they’re just very sarcastic.  Pretend it’s opposite day or something.

The Matrix: Reloaded

A worthy follow-up to the sci-fi action film of the century, with The Matrix: Reloaded the Wachowski Brothers have literally re-re-invented the genre.  Keanu Reeves is spectacular in the first non-wooden performance of his career and the addition of several new characters is not unnecessary and doesn’t detract from the movie in any way.  Featuring one of the most gripping twists of all-time, it’s a perfect middle act to one of the greatest trilogies in the history of cinema.

Memento

This one proves a very important point: putting the scenes in reverse order will make a great film, even if it is totally uninteresting otherwise.

Be Kind Rewind

Michel Gondry proves he can make a film within the Hollywood system without the help of Charlie Kaufman.  Mos Def is always believable and never overly stupid.  All of the plot points are unexpected, yet inevitable, having none of that thrown-together feel of Gondry’s lesser works.  Every emotional moment hits home…  The only downside is that you can tell the director physically detests the ‘sweded’ films within the film, and those scenes suffer as a result.

Thirst

A film that isn’t so bizarre and inconsistent that it won’t make you question whether all of Park Chan-Wook’s other films were any good at all.

Jarhead

Sam Mendes makes good on what might be the best trailer of the decade.  It never feels like a lesser Full Metal Jacket with a lot of wandering around in the desert and some burning oil fields for good measure…  Surely, his future films will be equally engaging.

Sunshine

I can’t even write a mock, anti-review for this one.  Touted as a very science-oriented science-fiction film in the vein of 2001, it wasn’t anything of the sort.  After taking an absurdly long time getting to the sun, any number of crew members who, despite being the six or seven people on which the fate of the planet rested, were not screened for psychological stability start to lose their cool.  Of course, no one ever considered launching whatever bomb is supposed to re-ignite the sun from Earth or Earth’s orbit.  That would be silly.  No, we’d rather have the last fifteen minutes be one longer hyper-cutting blur.  Yes. Literally.  A blur.

Syriana

An epic thriller on the level of any of the other great multi-layered, interwoven narratives of the decade, Syriana is a perfect film.  Never feeling shallow or spread-too-thin, its wonderful cast is put to good use throughout.  It made me cry, also.

Blindness

Cementing Fernando Meireilles place as one of the top directors of the decade, this beautifully experimental adaptation of José Saramago’s brilliant novel was both a critical and box-office smash. Before you see anything else, see this.

Grindhouse

The double-feature of the decade which was a box-office smash and spawned two sequels… Robert Rodriguez avoids making a cheesier, zombie version of all of his other films and decides to actually make a vulgar, violent, trashy film with an impressively low-fi feel.  His best film since El Mariachi.  Tarantino pulls a fast one on us, and instead of making an actually terrible movie with an adrenaline-filled action sequence in the climax (befitting the title), he comes at us with a clever, subtle and well-acted horror pic with his best writing since Pulp Fiction.  Unfortunately, the bridging trailers sucked.

Moon

This one is tough to put my finger on.  I thought it was going to be a defining moment among last year’s films.  A lot of things were done right, but ultimately I was unmoved.  At times, the dialogue felt like it was reaching around for something it never found.  The big reveal isn’t even much of a reveal.  This one might’ve been a case of having too high of expectations.  At least, Duncan Jones called out Avatar for being the mediocre film it is.  Looking forward to his future films…

  I think Jesse’s been a little tough on the 00’s.  I don’t know if I necessarily would’ve jumped to this decade’s defense, except that Mr. Price was exceptionally cruel to it.  First, were the 90’s really that great (for cinema)?  Yes, and no.  For American cinema they were phenomenal.  First, we see a number of established directors who got their start in the late 60’s, early 70’s bouncing back from the funk  that was the better part of the 80’s to produce some impressive work again- Scorsese with Goodfella’s, Casino, Kundun, Spielberg with Schindler’s List, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan.  Even Woody Allen takes to experimenting with Husbands and Wives and Deconstructing Harry.

      Next, we see the birth of a new generation of indie filmmakers, spurred on by an ever-increasing accessibility to the industry through music videos & commercials (David Fincher, Spike Jonze, etc), as well as through festivals geared toward low-budget fare and unheard of talent (Steven Soderbergh, Quentin Tarantino, the Andersons, and so on…).  Disney started turning out great animated films for the first time in years, and Pixar birthed itself.

      Now, Jesse also mentioned the 70’s as being a decade to rival these magnificent 90’s.  To this, I also disagreed (the 60’s kicked the 70’s butt), and it got me thinking.  Luckily, I happen to have an extensive database of great films.  That might sound silly, but it makes it easy to look things like this up, so every time I watch a film I think I’ll want to remember down the line, I put it in.  The movies are also given one of three ratings (there’ll be a quiz on this at the end).

      Okay.  While reviewing my facts, I found some interesting statistics.  The 90’s produced 32 American films in the top tier.  The 00’s also produced 32 American films in the top tier.  Now, certainly I’ve watched more films in the 2000’s, and like Jesse, I watched most of the great films from the 90’s (excepting The Lion King) in the past 6 or 7 years, so the fact that they’re the same isn’t the telling statistic. What is, is that for the 90’s there are only a dozen foreign films with this highest rating.  For the 00’s (the Bond decade?) there are 27.

      Even more pointed is that over half of those 12 films belong to Wong Kar-Wai and Kieslowski.  Von Trier, Yimou Zhang, and Hirokazu Kore-eda all chimed in with some impressive films, as well, but for the most part it was an Americans-only party.

      The 00’s were anything but.  We were witness to a renaissance of sorts in South Korea as censorship was lifted and increased promotion of homegrown films lead to both domestic and international success.  Park Chan-Wook, Bong Joon-Ho, Kim Ji-Woon, Lee Chang-Dong, Kim Ki-Duk, Im Sang-Soo, Hong Sang-Soo, Ryoo Seung-Wan: if you don’t know these names, you should.  Or, you will.

      Staying in the Far East, Japanese and Chinese cinema have both showed increasingly interesting products from their lower-priced fare.  Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Jia Zhang-ke, Shinji Aoyama, to name a few.

      The increased global communication that may be leading to the death of the critic, as Jesse pointed to, has also lead to an upswing in the awareness of films from all across the world.

      I mean, the fact that I can point to equally great Thai or Romanian or any number of other country’s filmmakers says a lot about the state of things.  It’s not like I’m the only one who’s noticed this either.  Americans re-made an absurd amount of foreign films this decade.  A remake even won best picture (The Departed, and it was good, but probably the least impactful of any of Scorsese’s great films).  And, if Hollywood wasn’t buying up foreign properties, they were hiring foreign talent.  Inarritu, del Toro, Cuaron, Meireilles, Tykwer… even Wong Kar-Wai made an English-language film.  I mean, it got so bad that Michael Haneke re-made his own film with the same title and the same shots, in English.  Eastwood’s best film of the decade is in Japanese.  Gondry’s best film was in French (not surprising).  At least half of anything Tarantino shot was in another language.  Mel Gibson, even more so.  Wes Anderson went abroad; and a film shot in India with an entirely Indian cast wins best picture.

      Only a few of the Americans to stay home weren’t too busy fooling around with fancy new cameras to actually make some good films.  Paul Thomas Anderson knocks it out of the park. Twice.  Spike Jonze has a couple winners.  The Coens come up with a few impressive films in the middle of the country.  But, yeah, that’s few and far between. 

      Oh, and Terrence Malick made a film.  That’s worth mentioning on it’s own.  

      So, in conclusion, it was an international decade.  There was plenty of great cinema; it just didn’t come from here.  You should broaden your horizons.  Look to the future.  Look across the seas.  And, look forward to the 2010’s.

Our choices are presented with commentary from the other:

Editor’s Note: Jesse is a self-centered prick who didn’t want to spend much time writing about Kevin’s picks so he just dismisses them all instead of trying to reach some understanding. Like the close-minded, fake liberal, closeted racists that he is.

10. George Washington

I’m glad David Gordon Green is represented on your list as well. I watched this movie for the second time a little while back and it wasn’t as good as I remember it being. Very original and singular. A very good film.

9. O Brother, Where Art Thou?

I have mixed feelings about this movie. In my head, I don’t think its very good. In reality, every time I watch it I find myself laughing. But, I think it’s too “sticky” (?) to transcend beyond an enjoyable, funny movie. But, an interesting pick.

8.  Last Life in the Universe

Okay, this better be just the one token foreign film on your list that you feel like you have to put on just to appear to be, "educated". I never saw the movie and had to IMDB it. That means its probably terrible.

7. Adaptation.

Glad you agree that this movie is awesome. I still remember watching this movie for the first time and thinking, “Wow. You can make a movie like this?” And, I don’t mean the structure or the plot or the wackiness; I mean a story about a lonely guy who masturbates to the picture of an author on the liner of a book.

6. Oldboy

I haven’t seen Oldboy, so I’ll just assume it is like any other film I have seen from Korea. Oh, how original- America is the reason there’s a monster that kills everyone. Why don’t you just call it Godzilla and get it over with. And where are they taking the express to, huh? Chris Tucker is super annoying too.

5. Punch-Drunk Love

This movie is superb. It would be in my top twenty. Easily better than There Will Be Blood. I’m glad you weren’t one of those people that bought into the whole There Will Be Blood, is brilliant because it’s not fun, and its period, and Daniel Day Lewis gives an out of his mind performance, so we have to act like the movie is equal to his performance. When it wasn’t. Good job, sir.

4. Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance

Why don’t you just marry Korea!

3. There Will Be Blood

What! Are you kidding me!

2. The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

Wow. This was his worst film of the decade (of which he made one good film) and his worst film ever. And you put it number two of the decade? Wow. Really? Huh.

1. In the Mood for Love

You’re sooooooooooooo different you like Asian people. Whatever, you suck.

Notables: Oasis, Mother, those Rings films, Dogville, & French cinema returns

Jesse’s choices with Kevin’s commentary:

10. Sweet and Lowdown
     Woody Allen + Sean Penn + Django Reinhardt – (didn’t this come out last decade) = Great movie. 

Jesse's Note: For the record my number ten was Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. Kevin got my list confused. Idiot.

9. All the Real Girls
      Certainly not as wonderful or strange as his debut film, David Gordon Green’s follow-up is nonetheless solid.  Set in the mountains of North Carolina, it follows a twenty-something guy searching for romance and meaning in his life.  I think that’s right.  It’s been awhile since I’ve seen this.  I remember very distinctly that what I imagined this film to be after reading Roger Ebert’s 4-star review was nothing like the actual film.  What I remember most is actually a sequence of time-lapse photography involving factories.  Add that to Zooey Deschanel and the North Carolina mountains and you’ve got a recipe for a winner. 

 8. Wet Hot American Summer
      I was a little surprised by this choice.  I once ran across this movie on TV and half-watched about three-quarters of it (that’s three-eighths viewed, for the math impaired).  I didn’t think it was particularly funny.  There might’ve been some pretty girls, but I can’t guarantee that.  This is definitely the kind of movie that would have to be hilarious in order to want to watch it again, but since I only vaguely remember it, it obviously wasn’t.  Was Justin Long in this? 

 7. The Good Shepherd
     I haven’t seen this film.  I’ve wanted to.  It must be good, really.  Robert de Niro, Matt Damon, Alec Baldwin, Angelina Jolie…  It was written by Eric Roth who also penned Forrest Gump, Munich, and Benjamin Button, and photographed by Scorsese and Tarantino’s recent cinematographer of choice, Robert Richardson.  Following the early history of the CIA, this ought to be a great one, and it probably is. 

 6. Traffic
     Let me start off by saying that Steven Soderbergh is one of the most interesting directors, in this country (the US), today.  Somehow he’s been able to effortless move from curious, low-budget fare like Bubble, to huge, blockbusters like his Ocean’s trilogy.  That being said, Traffic is my least favorite of any of his films.  I actually stopped watching it, which I honestly can’t remember happening with any other movie at the moment.  There characters are all ugly, dislikable people.  And not in the good way.  Sometimes ugly, dislikables are fascinating.  Not these.  They were boring, predictable.  I don’t ever remember being surprised by the film.  It just felt cliché ridden, and I had no hope for it to get any better.  So, I turned it off.  It didn’t even look good, which is never the case for Peter Andrews. 

 5. The Squid and the Whale
     Pretty much a not-fun Wes Anderson film.  Or, better yet, it’s a prequel to all of Wes’s films in which we actually get to see the breakdown of the father-son relationship that’s such a consistent thematic backdrop in Anderson’s work.  But, here, it’s just kind of dark and vaguely depressing, without as much of the absurdity.  The best line in the film comes after out young protagonist gets caught ripping off Pink Floyd.  “I didn’t write it, but I could have.”  I bet Wes Anderson said the same thing after watching this one. 

 4. 40-Year-Old-Virgin
     Was this film really that funny?  If you like improvised dick, boob, and aggressive humor, as well as Steve Carell in awkward scenarios, then you might like this.  Actually, that sounds like a recipe for comedy to me.  But, you might be surprised, too. 

 3. Lost in Translation
     I like Lost in Translation.  Bill Murray is good as always.  Scarlet Johansson is very good and beautiful to boot.  But, the film, as a whole, left me wanting.  At least, I didn’t think it was as brilliant as everyone else.  Part of this may be that it bears great similarity to Last Life in the Universe.  Premiering three weeks ahead of Translation, Last Life parallels in the plot and theme departments.  Featuring a Japanese living quietly in Thailand, played by the always-interesting Tadanobu Asano, the film follows his life as it spirals out-of-control after his yakuza brother shows up.  Of course, that sounds kind of ridiculous, but it’s handled with the same meditative loneliness as is so prominent in Lost in Translation, but is ultimately both more dreamlike and affecting.  So, if you liked Sofia Coppola’s film, check out Last Life in the Universe by Pen-ek Ratanaruang.  Or, check it out if you didn’t. 

 2. Almost Famous
      Almost Famous is a great film.  There’s no denying it.  There’s no ignoring it.  If you have any affinity for rock music, particularly anything Led Zeppelin-ish, then you can’t but enjoy this film.  I actually can’t think of anyone who wouldn’t like this.  It’s made with such obvious love for both the music and the era that it just oozes off the screen.  Oozy rock’n’roll love…  Don’t miss it.  I don’t know how you could’ve, but if you did, check it out today.  Go.  Yes, now.  I’ll wait. 

 1.  Adaptation.
      There is nothing. Absolute nothingness.  And out of that we see the entire history of the planet, then life, evolution, I’m born, I grow up, and I’m sitting at my computer.  I want to explain how great Adaptation. is.  I can’t seem to find the words. Where do I start? Oh! I know. I’ll show the whole history of the world to this point, and then show myself trying to write this post.  I’ll go into my personal life and how it relates to the film.  I seem to have written myself into a corner.  I know Jesse is going to have to write a post on this one, too, since it’s in my top ten.  How would he write it?  I should call him… Spike Jonze is an absolute genius.  The fact that he could make such a great film.  That he could make it so that it is completely understandable, yet so complex as to be indescribable.  Sometimes, when I’m out drinking with my friends, I try to tell them about this movie, but they don’t listen to me.  They’re distracted by girls- by some girl who catches their eye who they then imagine all sorts of fantasies with.  They live out their entire lives with this one girl in the next 20 seconds.  They have sex, kids, a house, grow old, travel the world…  Then, their friend taps them on the shoulder. “What did you say?” “Isn’t Adaptation great?” “Haven’t seen it.”  Then, he gets in a fight with some guy over the girl.  It’s his dream to get in a fight with some guy over a girl.  I talk to Jesse about how his post is coming.  He’s not done, yet.  Cue time-lapse of flowers growing.  Fade out.

I baby sit from time to time and here are a couple of stories about poop involving the kids I babysit.

Story one:

One of the two-year-olds I baby sit had to take a poop. I was waiting in the bathroom with her as she was pooping (we were using a public restroom).

Once, she pooped she screamed, "I pooped." She smiled looked at me and immediately said, "I'm stronger than you!"

Story two:

I baby sit a three-year-old girl from time to time. One week she was having problems pooping. Constipation. And, the police drove by the car with their lights and sirens on and she asked what do police do. I told her, "People call them when they need help." She thought for a second and then said, "Maybe the people need help pooping."

Story three:

I was babysitting the same girl from story one. And, she told me, out of nowhere, "It's not okay to eat real poop. But, it's okay to eat imaginary poop."

My boss and I are watching a fuzzy VHS taping of an Elvis impersonator and a band.

He says

This must be 1983 or '84.  That's me there.

He points to himself, a brownish blur.

That guy, he could play the Hell out of the guitar.

Another blur.

He used to stick his cigarette at the end of it.

It'd burn all the way down, but he moved so little the ash never fell.

He'd screw anything that moved, too...

my ex-fiancee included.

She was a whore.

...

The video cuts off.

We take it out and the tape has snapped.

He sets about to fix it.

I go back to work.

I think it's starting to rain.

I had never heard of Lady Gaga until I saw picture of her performing at this year’s MTV Music awards. She was covered in fake blood and appeared to be singing, or having an orgasm. I was confused. What the fuck was going on? This looked like an idea of bad taste mixed with stupidity, and yet I was turned on. But, in the kind of way where you see something so disgusting it becomes sexy. Anyone else get that? Just me? Anyway, it was weird.

Well, I forgot about it until I saw a clip of her from SNL. Not performing her music. It was a skit with Andy Samberg where they were both wearing outfits with plastic bubbles on them. They tried to kiss and couldn’t because of the bubbles. I found it funny and found her attractive, although I couldn’t pinpoint one single feature of her's that I found attraction. I don’t think she is pretty. Her body appears oddly sculpted, so perfect its bland. Still though, I found myself wanting to, for lack of a better phrase, “put my p in her v.”

At this point I had not heard any of her music. That would change after I watched somewhere between two and thirteen videos on YouTube. All of her songs are bad and actually appear to be the same song. I probably wouldn’t have known they were different songs if the videos hadn’t changed. They just feel like a pop song Mad Lib: Innuendo of Sexual Body part + Techno Beat + Spoken Word Chorus. And, after several focus groups with teenagers with sub-par intelligences and crappy parents we got Lady Gaga’s album.

But, something weird happened. I became more infatuated with her. Still, I can’t tell you one single trait or characteristic of hers that I like. The more I find out about her, the more evidence I have to extinguish my feelings of longing for her, but the brighter those feelings burn.

Now, you have to imagine how my concern/infatuation/confusion over the Lady Gaga situation went into another more concerning/infatuated/confused stratosphere when I found out that it is widely believed that she may in fact be a man. Is my odd, indefinable infatuation with her based on the fact that I somehow sense that between those perfectly sculpted, smooth thighs are male genitals?

It's a little too much for me to make sense of right now...

I'm getting ready to move, and, in my gathering of stuff, I found a notebook from when I was 7.

Of particular interest, was the spelling/handwriting section. In each case, I had to come up with a sentence for the spelling word we were given* (Note: I've realized that some of them were supposed to be us giving definitions, not just sentences). What follows is both surprising and incredibly direct. I wish I could remember if I wrote them as honest fact, or with some sense of irony. Probably, they were the first thing that came to my head. I enjoyed finding and reading them, while wondering what I was thinking for most. Hopefully, you'll do the same.

 And now, exactly as written:

Writer. Person who puts letters on paper.

Beehive. I've seen a beehive, but with no bees.

Ride. To be carried.

Talk. I don't like to talk.

Teeth. I like my teeth.

Party. Group of people having a good time together.

Mark. Unit of money in East Germany and West Germany.

Nose. The part of your body used to breath.

Lion. A lion is a large animal that looks like a cat.

Old. Has lived a longgg time.

Secret. I hope a secret will come true.

Sailboat. I didn't have a sentence.

Know. I know everything.

Are. You are next.

Mmhmm. Oh, 1995...

Spike Jonze and Where the Wild Things Are

It’s now happened twice, once in the form of a text message and once as an iChat response. And though they weren’t explicitly typed out, I suspect an alternating stream of question marks and exclamation points were more than likely implied: Seriously?!?!?!

That’s code for “Are you out of your mind?” Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe they were genuinely asking. Maybe there was only one question mark. I’m not so sure, though, because when another friend actually heard the news (not all of my interactions are electronic), he simply let out a disappointed sigh. That confirmed it. I was meant to feel shame.

I really wanted to like Where the Wild Things Are. But I didn’t. What’s worse is now I actually do feel ashamed. I experience a quiet pang of jealousy whenever I hear about someone else being swept away by the film. It’s like I’ve been chosen last for Team Nostalgia. No, it’s worse than that. It’s like I’ve been asked not to play at all, to sit on the sidelines and watch the other kids have all the fun. And it’s a terrible feeling. Thanks for nothing, Spike Jonze.

Okay, maybe I’m just being overdramatic. Jonze has given me plenty to be thankful for. He easily could’ve retired after his brilliant debut feature, Being John Malkovich, and still left behind an impressive array of dazzling and inspired music videos and commercials. He’s proven himself time and again to be one of our most gifted high-wire-act filmmakers, and in order to write about what he does so well with any degree of accuracy, I must abuse adverbs. That is to say, his best work is: deceptively simple, hysterically funny, unexpectedly insightful, wildly inventive, richly nuanced, surprisingly emotional. In the case of something like Malkovich, any given scene could be all of these things at once.

Jonze is something of a magician, but one blessed with a casual touch. If his magic seems effortless, it’s precisely because he’s able to make the tricks themselves disappear. In both Being John Malkovich and Adaptation, the director displays a knack for transforming intimidating, conceptual material into perfectly modulated pieces of storytelling. The magic is in the doing all right, only Jonze appears not to be doing anything at all. His camera is unobtrusive and accepting, his observational approach more rooted in the philosophies of Pennebaker and Maysles than in the popular cinema of Spielberg and Scorsese. It’s a technique that lends credibility to the incredible; moments aren’t staged for the camera as much as they’re allowed to unfold before our eyes, even those moments where, say, a puppeteer discovers a secret portal into John Malkovich’s head.

There’s nothing fussy or insistent about Jonze’s style, and yet we’re somehow aware of his presence. You feel it in the way he’s able to make even the most schizoid of comic fantasies seem deeply human. (Without him, I fear Being John Malkovich and Adaptation might have been little more than unbridled, cerebral exercises in cleverness. For proof, see Synecdoche, New York.) Jonze is the rare director who can find the humanity in a discarded desk lamp without it ever feeling manipulative. He collects images while giving them an authentic emotional shape at the same time. He’s the lens and the filter, a documentarian of the strange and surreal as well as our emotional barometer. He navigates tricky, narrative landscapes with confidence, and he’s a trustworthy tour guide.

In case it’s not obvious, I’m a big fan of Spike Jonze. It’s only natural, then, that my disappointment with Where the Wild Things Are comes as something of a shock. On a purely superficial level, there’s not a huge difference between Jonze’s approach here and his two other features, but only half of what makes him a terrific filmmaker is on display. The beauty of his work has never rested in what he’s able to imbue onto the image. It’s what he’s able to draw out of it. If his lens is non-judgmental, then his filter is unfailingly empathetic. He has the unique ability to position his camera in front of almost any character (a frustrated puppeteer, a neurotic screenwriter, that discarded lamp) and have us share in their emotional state. The more foreign or absurd the scenario, the more attuned Jonze is to his characters. His greatest gift as a storyteller, it turns out, is his empathy. But being a cinematic empath has its disadvantages, too.

Spike Jonze is never the main attraction of his films, and he seems perfectly content with being invisible. He’s not what I’d call a personal filmmaker – not the kind of personal filmmaker who views cinema as a confessional or self-expressive medium, anyway – and there’s nothing wrong with that. Or, at least, there wouldn’t be anything wrong with that had Where the Wild Things Are not been Jonze’s most intensely personal film. In Max, the rebellious young protagonist of Maurice Sendak’s book, Jonze has finally found a kindred spirit, and he’s all but cast himself in the lead role. Sure, that’s Max Records on-screen, but it’s Jonze who we’re really watching. He set out to make a film about the emotional confusion of childhood, but seeing Where the Wild Things Are, it’s clear Jonze still hasn’t quite come to grips with those wild feelings. I’m the last person who would ever begrudge an artist for working out the particulars of their life in front of an audience, but Jonze has always been an intentionally evasive subject. For the first time, his camera is pointed back at him and, unfortunately, there’s not much to see.

Media profiles of the director tend to paint him as a borderline idiot savant: a unique and brilliant artist, but also awkward, uncomfortable, rambling, nervous, stuttering, unwilling or unable to talk about himself or his process, inarticulate. I initially believed it was all an act, a calculated piece of performance art not unlike Richard Koufey, the dancer/choreographer alter ego Jonze assumed in Fatboy Slim’s “Praise You” music video. But in a recent Entertainment Weekly article, Vincent Landay, his producer of sixteen years, confirms it’s not just his way of messing with journalists: “It's hard to get inside the head of Spike Jonze…most of the time I only understand 60 percent of what he wants. Nobody knows exactly what he wants until it's over.”

Jonze may not have a way with words (John Malkovich even claims to have asked if English was his second language when they first met), but thus far, he hasn’t had much use for them. His work has always spoken for itself. And even if his success is owed entirely to intuition, his previous films haven’t suffered as a result. Nor does it seem to have affected his professional relationships; he has a regular team of collaborators – producer, cinematographer, production designer, costume designer, editor, composer – who follow him from project to project. But coupling Jonze’s communication deficit with his emotional insularity has left Where the Wild Things Are somewhat stillborn. He can’t seem to articulate what’s in his head or in his heart, which makes for a curiously detached viewing experience. In their own way, Being John Malkovich and Adaptation were also about a desire to escape, but unlike the protagonists in those films, we watch Max’s journey without ever really investing in it, and the film’s success or failure ultimately rests in how much of ourselves we’re willing to project onto the screen.

Where the Wild Things Are asks for our recognition and nothing else. Like Jonze, I saw a lot of myself in Max, too. (The wild thing in me once punched my sister in the stomach as hard as he could for no good reason while we waited for the school bus.) Clearly, recognition is a very powerful force for those who enjoyed the film, but Jonze is rarely able to supplement our identification in a way that is more meaningful than its face value. There are, of course, exceptions. My favorite moment in the entire film occurs in the first ten minutes. Max lies at his mother’s feet while she works at the computer. He gently pulls on the toes of her pantyhose. She asks him to tell her a story. He tells her one about vampires. As he speaks, she types out his words. That’s it. It’s a beautiful scene, tenderly performed, and Jonze’s coverage is perfect in its simplicity. Most of it plays out in singles, one on Max underneath the desk, and the other on his mother, from Max’s point of view. It resonates not just because Jonze nails every detail, not just because he found the right shots, and not just because the performers are terrific. It resonates because it speaks to the mother-son relationship in a way that’s much greater than anything specifically in the scene.

There are a few other reasons to admire the film, too. I appreciated the lack of sentimentality, and the Wild Things themselves – oversized puppet suits with CG faces – are wonderfully and distinctively expressive. It’s no small feat that they are able to occupy the same frame as Max, and seeing them interact is not unlike the first time you saw the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park. These are real, living and breathing creatures – conjured from a generation’s collective memories of Sendak’s pictures, and made physically present. It was actually Sendak himself who encouraged Spike Jonze to adapt and personalize his 10-sentence children’s book into a feature film – an offer the director routinely, but politely, turned down. Having now seen Jonze’s adaptation, I can’t help but think he was right to decline. The power of Sendak’s book is significantly diffused when expanded to 100 minutes. And while Jonze may capture truthful, childish behavior in his new film, I honestly think there’s more childlike wonder in Being John Malkovich and Adaptation. Watching those films, there’s the playful sense that anything can happen, and Jonze makes the impossible seem real. Where the Wild Things Are finds the director navigating a similarly tricky, narrative landscape – but one maybe too close to own his heart. Unfortunately, our tour guide has abandoned his post. He’s run off to join the dirt-clod fight, and left us behind.