2009: From Best to Worst

Update: Having looked over my list for a few days, I decided to re-organize it into a few categories. Though they are still ultimately listed from worst-to-best, here's how I'd describe the seventeen films I saw of 2009.

THE WORST
Old Dogs
The Hangover
2012

DISAPPOINTMENTS
Public Enemies
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
The Informant!
The Princess and the Frog

HONORABLE MENTIONS
Where The Wild Things Are
Brüno
Zombieland
Avatar
Watchmen

TOP FIVE
5. Inglourious Basterds
4. Up in the Air
3. Moon
2. Up
1. District 9

There you have it. May 2010 bring you all a happy new year and a wondrous new decade of movie viewing... and shit.

"Up in the Air" soars

I think I can safely say that I've seen all of the 2009 movies that I want to see/are available to see.

UP IN THE AIR (2009)

It's no coincidence that Ryan Bingham is an expert in traveling light.

Such is the life of Bingham (George Clooney), a man so emotionally cut off that he has no "personal baggage;" a man that lives hub-to-hub, hotel-to-hotel, flying away from whatever connections he makes in the sheer seconds it takes to buy a plane ticket.

"Up in the Air," Jason Reitman's directorial follow-up to 2007's "Juno," tackles some of today's most stressful issues but with enough Hollywood schmaltz to keep you from hanging yourself from the rafters of the cinema.

Bingham works for a company hired out to fire employees en masse, flying cross-country to do so. When an ambitious young newcomer to the company suggests that they move to carry out firings with webcams to cut costs and boost efficiency, Bingham feels threatened that his livelihood will be ransacked; that he will be forced to settle down somewhere and make commitment.

Reitman's commentary on the modern day social disconnect — something in which technology can easily be considered a culprit — is one that rings true, especially when transplanted to the character arc of Bingham. Does it serve as the catalyst to bring him toward a life with love, stability, and a house instead of a hotel room?

Guess you'll have to find out for yourself.

A-

"Avatar," fuck yeah!

I never thought I'd see pterodactyls versus airplanes in a movie. Thank you "Avatar."

AVATAR (2009)

"Avatar" is much like an Ohio State football game. For fifty-nine minutes and fifty-nine seconds, all you get is running up the middle and punts.

But then, at the last second, Tressel sends in his favorite unit, the field goal team, to boot the game-winning field goal through the uprights. With another notch in the win column, everyone goes home happy, blissfully neglecting the frustration of the first 3,599 seconds of the match.

"Avatar," a 160 minute epic, is much the same, building up and building up until a rousing and epic action finale that is sure to boost your testosterone levels up to "Jersey Shore" levels of unfathomable. That's not to say "Avatar" is perfect, as it is very much not so, suffering from an almost infinite level of exposition, as well as an overly simplistic story and the aesthetic of a video game, but in the end, "Avatar" is a rewarding, true-blue example of cinematic escapism that sends audiences off right.

The CGI ain't perfect - it's still noticeable and it's used in abundance - but it's used almost as well as any film that's used in it such force before it. On a technical level, "Avatar" is solid, though I'd be cautious to call it groundbreaking as the technical accomplishments of "Avatar" leave me wary of the future of filmmaking. But I suppose that's all a matter of preference, is it not? After all, the advances in computer graphics made the pros of "Avatar" possible.

Still though, despite its lengthy buildup, "Avatar" is a fine piece of escapism, one that takes us to other worlds and immerses us in their environment. Literally. And while the parallels to other films might instill an unwanted sense of deja vu ("'Dances with Wolves' in Space" is a common and accurate descriptor), "Avatar" serves up enough entertainment value to make the dent in your wallet entirely forgettable.

B

Duncan Jones shoots for the "Moon"

There have been quite a few allegedly great films that I've missed this year, so with awards season kicking into gear, I figure I might as well try to catch up now. After finally getting "Inglourious Basterds" and "The Hangover" under my belt, next in the queue was...

MOON (2009)

"I am the one and only."

Such poignant verse to describe the lonely, desolate nature of the moon, the place where Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), a contract employee for a corporation mining the moon for alternative energy on Earth, has spent the last three years destitute of civilization.

"Moon," the freshman project of director Duncan Jones, is a triumph; a taut and thrilling science fiction adventure without the frills of contemporary outer space cinema. Conjuring up the echos of genre classics "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Alien" as well as recent successes like Danny Boyle's "Sunshine," "Moon" is a terse, atmospheric film that succeeds in capturing the reclusive nature of the great beyond.

"Moon" has enough twists and turns to keep audiences interested, though despite its brisk 97 minute runtime, "Moon" tends to bog down in its midsection. However, a slow-moving middle isn't enough to bring "Moon" down as the flick benefits from a tour-de-force performance from Sam Rockwell, beautifully sterile production design, and a brooding, atmospheric musical accompaniment from Clint Mansell.

Though "Moon" presents nothing particularly new thematically with its presentation of space and its critique of big business, its translation to a lunar setting is fresh and commendable. Despite not being the spectacle of other recent sci-fi blockbusters like "Star Trek" and "Transformers," "Moon" is a thrilling, smart, and wonderfully lensed science fiction tale that shoots for the moon and succeeds in every way.

A-

"The Hangover" is the filmic equivalent to an actual hangover

Spoiler: The story of "The Hangover" is based around the fact that the four lead characters are accidentally roofied. As for me, well, I would have voluntarily roofied myself before watching "The Hangover" had I known what was about to pillage my senses for two hours.

THE HANGOVER (2009)

"The Hangover" has done something unimaginable. Without getting too hyperbolic, "The Hangover" has joined the ranks of cinema's greatest comedic achievements, alongside such titles as "Schindler's List," "Requiem for a Dream," and the part in "Bambi" when Bambi's mom died.

It's that unfunny.

But what can you expect from a film that appeals to the lowest common denominator? "The Hangover" is a celluloid wet dream for every frat guy in America; every bro's desire in life fulfilled. Really, it is...

Get drunk. Go to Vegas. Forget everything.

And what's up with this cast? Apart from Zack Galifianakis stealing the show, the rest of the non-farcical foursome falls horribly flat, with "The Office" star Ed Helms falling the hardest.

The biggest problem with "The Hangover" is one that tends to be particularly problematic for comedies: it's just not funny. It aims to be comical and misses the mark wildly, ultimately being 100 minutes of unfunny exposition that builds up to an unfunny denouement.

A blending of "Three Men and a Baby," "Tommy Boy," and "Old School," "The Hangover" winds up being a tremendous misfire; a flick that runs its duration without more than a snide snicker or an occasional throwback to an unoriginal plot device. Easily the most wildly overrated film of the year, "The Hangover" is a complete swing-and-a-miss that does little more than appeal to the popped-collar inside all of us.

D

"Inglourious Basterds" offers up fun... and body parts

I remember the weekend "Inglourious Basterds" came out. It was the weekend I puked up my kidney, had a 137 degree fever, sweat away 20% of my body weight in water, and lost my appetite for four days.

Bright side? I was thin and sexy. Down side? I missed the opening weekend for "Inglourious Basterds." A short review ensues.

INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS (2009)

You can usually pick out familiar cues in auteur cinema. Kubrick had the long tracking shots. Hitchcock had his focus on camera tricks.

Tarantino has gratuitous instances of intestines and brain matter being sprayed in your face.

"Inglourious Basterds" is no different from the other chapters in Tarantino's bloody library, only this time, over-the-top gore complements a pulpy, oh-how-we-wish-it-turned-out-that-way take on Hitler's Nazi reign during World War II. Though dialogue runs rampant, almost to the point that the film's 152 minute runtime starts to slack, the silly, overly-cinematic use of poetic (or in this case, historic?) license results in a fun, though incessantly gory, historical satire.

Despite being pedantic in pace as well as serving as a medium for Quentin Tarantino to jerk off to human carnage for mass audiences, "Basterds," benefiting from wondrous and exuberant performances from Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt, serves up a fun, gory, and overly theatrical fictionalized account of World War II sure to rouse audiences, most especially in its final thirty minutes.

While talk of "Basterds" being the best film of the decade might be a bit of hyperbole, "Inglourious Basterds" is still a two-and-a-half-hour celebration of cinema that brings together superb storytelling and eccentric thespianism in successful form.

A-

"The Princess and the Frog" teaches stereotypes to a new generation

Brought to you by the same civil rights activists that gave the world "Song of the South," comes...

THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG (2009)

Let's face it. Pixar pissed people off.

When Disney/Pixar's "Toy Story" opened to unforeseen success in 1995, purists proclaimed it the end of an era; the death-blow to the long reign of hand-drawn animation. Disney's "Nine Old Men" were now "ninety-year-old men." Computers were in. Paper-and-pencil were faux pas.

A decade-and-a-half later, and under the supervision of John Lasseter as executive producer and Chief Creative Officer of Walt Disney Animation Studios (and ironically the founder of Pixar), Mickey and company are back doing what they do best, though sadly, their un-retirement isn't up-to-par.

"The Princess and the Frog" tells a familiar fable of ordinary Disney proportions. Though character work is fleshed and thoughtful, the story lacks any sense of iconic weight that propelled previous hand-drawn Disney classics to fame. Musical numbers at times pull their weight in heart and charm, but at other times are superfluous and boggy.

The animation here recalls the films of Disney past, though at times the computer-enhancement seems jarring. Still though, Disney's flourishing color palettes shine and the classic character designs pull through, making "The Princess and the Frog" a trip down memory lane that's worth the price of admission.

However, the one problem plaguing "The Princess and the Frog" is one that the hand-drawn Disney films have had for decades now and have shown an unwillingness to change. "The Princess and the Frog" has no qualms bringing stereotypes to life, moreso typecasting the people (and animals, I guess) of Louisiana as toothless, jazz-loving Cajuns who want to do nothing more than eat gumbo and play with voodoo.

Is that really something you want to perpetuate in your child's head?

Regardless, "The Princess and the Frog" serves as an adequate memory-jolt of the classic Disney films that are staples in everyone's library. Though the film lacks the iconography of the more heralded Disney flicks and seems to have no problem painting the picture that all Southerners have rampant tooth decay and a love for Tobasco sauce, "The Princess and the Frog" remains an apt 97 minutes of Disney magic rekindled for a new generation of movie-goers.

B-