My Top 10 Films of 2006

Matt Damon once remarked in an interview that it would be a good idea if Oscars were given out a full decade after their release, as he felt that was the gap needed to make a determination on the best of that year. While this site clearly isn't the Oscars, it at least now has the benefit of something it didn't before: Hindsight.

So, now it's time to find out. In celebration of 10 Years of "Jeremy The Critic," my picks for the top 10 films of each year from 2006-2015 will be gradually revealed. Unsuccessfully cramming to see all the year's films before it's end has prevented me from compiling these so now it's make-up time. With apologies to ESPN, it's a little project I'll be calling "10 FOR 10," as I unload 10 Top 10's.

We'll find out which films survived the long trek, maintaining or increasing their standing in my mind, and which slipped, as the bloom comes off the rose for titles I may have originally raved about. Now, they'll all face the ultimate equalizer: FATHER TIME. A review is so often an immediate reaction to what you've seen, while a star rating counts for far less. This will be something else entirely.

Other than in the case of rare, tie-breaking situations, I'm not planning to rewatch anything, instead going with my gut in these rankings and selections. Some years I know exactly what's going to happen while others are still very much up in the air, but you can definitely bet on some surprises. I'm avoiding long, laborious explanations of each in favor of a choice review quote I feel says it all, accompanied with brief write-up where I reflect on how that year's list turned out. Let's get it going with what's unfortunately the weakest movie year of them all: 2006

                                                 2006

It feels like I'm just filling slots here, which is never good. The silver lining is that this will be followed by the strongest film year of the decade in 2007. Let's get the big questions out of the way first: Where's Pan's Labyrinth, Children of Men, Borat or The Fountain? I initially gave the former four stars, but now I need to actually be reminded of its existence. The other two I waffled back and forth on because they just haven't stayed with me at all. Notes on a Scandal, Marie Antoinette, and to a lesser extent, Casino Royale, were weaker runners-up that just missed the cut. It's possible that with another viewing one or more of those could have snuck in. Or not.

I had two choices in approaching a year this weak: Stick with what I originally had (with some minor, necessary adjustments) since so few of them were rewatched, or just make a systematic countdown of the technically best, critically acclaimed films of the year. Hopefully you appreciate me going with the former since you could just look at a bunch of other lists for that.

The only surprise inclusion is The Night Listener, which I had rewatched shortly after Robin Williams' passing and discovered I underestimated it. Featuring one of the actor's quietest dramatic performances, the whole package (which features a thought-provoking, ahead of its time premise) proves more memorable than many of the aforementioned prestige dramas critics were drooling over. V For Vendetta, The Descent and Clerks II are all just fine but I'd be lying if I said any would make it in a stronger year (or in this case nine stronger upcoming ones). While its recent influence on Mr. Robot proves Vendetta's reach was perhaps greater than expected, the inclusion of Clerks II kind of bothers me since I have this strange feeling it (or any other Kevin Smith film) wouldn't hold up now. That it still got in should let you know how little I think of this year.

Stranger Than Fiction has aged really well, partly because Ferrell hasn't done anything like it since. Other than my top two, it might be the only film here I feel any kind of passion for. Time couldn't dilute United 93's immediacy and power, even if its a film to respect rather than admire. Best Picture winner The Departed is just kind of a given, with its inclusion feeling almost like a contractual obligation at this point. Iñárritu's constant presence and versatility throughout the decade only bolsters the already strong multi-character, cross-cultural Babel in hindsight.

The first true discovery of '06 was Brick, starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt and helmed by future Breaking Bad and Star Wars director, Rian Johnson. If ever there was a time to say I told you so, it's now, with both continuing to creatively explode ten years on. But the top spot goes to Todd Field's Little Children, the most masterfully acted and directed film of the year in my favorite movie sub-genre: Nightmare in American Suburbia. It carries that torch proudly by being the most frighteningly realistic and disturbing drama that year. Over time, it's left the deepest cut.


10. The Night Listener

"The big draw of this film isn't the mystery, but the underlying idea behind its premise. How trusting should we be? Can we accept anything at face value anymore? Something to think about in this digital age where we communicate with people daily, yet can never know for sure who they really are." - 1/13/07


9. V For Vendetta

"The relationship that develops between her and the masked man, his history, and his motives for destroying the government build the framework for an emotionally complex tale that also happens to be pretty gory at times." - 8/2/06


8. The Descent

"In a way, the movie is almost a throw back to the horror films of the seventies, where the main objective was to torture you with suspense, then pick and choose your openings to deliver just the right amount of thrills and gore. It's not what you show, but what you don't, and how." - 1/10/07

 

 

 7. Clerks II

"The original Clerks was an excellent first feature by a film student that changed the course of independent cinema in the 90's. This is a more mature effort by an accomplished filmmaker at a different place in his life with more things to show and prove." -12/9/06


6. Stranger Than Fiction

"Harold Crick is an I.R.S. agent stuck in what could be called a routine. In actuality, he leads a painfully boring existence, but that doesn't really occur to him. It wouldn't since those immersed in their routine rarely stop to consider if they're bored or not, or more importantly if they're even remotely satisfied or happy."- 3/2/07


5. United 93

When we're finally in the air, there's more waiting. It becomes clear these terrorists really don't have much of a plan. They keep looking at each other, wondering when it's the right time. They can never agree. The sloppiness of the situation only makes it scarier. There were points when I felt like screaming at the screen for them just to do it so it's over with." - 9/11/06


4. The Departed

"The dangerous, heart-pounding game between the two main characters and the visceral energy DiCaprio and Damon infuse in them is where the meat of the film lies, making it one of Scorsese's most psychologically complex works. This is a movie about choices. Both good and bad." - 2/19/07


3. Babel

"A tiny event halfway across the world can carry ripple effects that impact others in ways that may seem impossible on paper. It has happened and continues to everyday. Misunderstandings and communication breakdowns can cause a bad situations to escalate into worse ones. No matter what your reaction to Babel is, you're at least forced to admit you had one." - 2/24/07


2. Brick

"Gordon-Levitt does things in this movie few actors his age could reasonably be expected to pull off at this point in his career. At first, it's off-putting seeing this scrawny kid with glasses walking around like a brooding mini-Brando, beating the hell out of everybody. Yet it's a testament to his abilities that after a while we don't question it at all. He pulls it off, building his reputation as one of the best rising young actors of his generation." - 9/9/06


1. Little Children

"From the opening scene, with figurines rattling on a shelf as the sound of an oncoming train approaches, we're prepared for tragedy as these characters' lives threaten to intersect in the worst possible way for over two tension-filled hours. Rarely does a film get so many little details right and hide such small treasures for the viewer to discover. - 5/13/07

Top Ten Films of 2006
1. Little Children (dir. Todd Field)
2. Brick (dir. Rian Johnson)
3. Babel (dir. Alejandro González Iñárritu)
4. The Departed (dir. Martin Scorsese)
5. United 93 (dir. Paul Greengrass)
6. Stranger Than Fiction (dir. Zach Helm)
7. Clerk II (dir. Kevin Smith)
8. The Descent (dir. Neil Marshall)
9. V For Vendetta (dir. James McTeigue)
10. The Night Listener (dir. Patrick Stettner)

World Trade Center

Director: Oliver Stone
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Michael Pena, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Maria Bello, Jay Hernandez, Michael Shannon
Running Time: 129 min.
Rating: PG-13

*** (out of ****)

Oliver Stone's World Trade Center is a well made disaster movie. And I'm not saying that to in any way trivialize the events of September 11th, but rather give you a good idea what to expect from the film. When I reviewed United 93 a few months ago I awarded it four stars, praising it for it's realism and emotional power. It didn't pull any punches as the horror of the high jacked flight that crashed in Pennsylvania on 9/11 unfolded in real time, documentary style. There were no "performances" or unearned dramatics and by the end your heart was in your throat. You can see more strings being pulled by the writers of World Trade Center and thus it ends up being just a movie about September 11th, which is both good and bad. It's emotional, but it's not emotionally powerful. It doesn't disrespect the memory of those who gave their lives on that day and delivers a message of hope and courage that makes it an interesting companion piece to United 93, which is the far superior film.

Ironically, Stone has taken a lot of heat for making the picture when it's actually the tamest and least controversial of his career. The only thing controversial about this is that he made a movie focusing on the events of 9/11, but even that's a moot point since someone already beat him to it. Still, this it's an involving effort that proves Oliver Stone can show restraint and that Nicolas Cage is capable of giving a controlled performance when he needs to.

The first thing that struck me about this film is how well it captures the look and the feel of September 11th. It was a beautiful fall day and everyone was just going about their business as they would on any morning without a clue of what was about to happen between 10 and 10:30 a.m. In a frightening, yet strangely uplifting shot Stone shows us the New York City skyline in all it's glory with The Twin Towers standing triumphantly over Manhattan. Even though you're prepared for the shot and it's absolutely necessary to tell the story, I'd be lying if I told you it still wasn't very uncomfortable and creepy, especially in the context of a major Hollywood motion picture.

Port Authority policemen John McLoughlin (Nicolas Cage) and Will Jimeno (Michael Pena) are just starting their day when Tower 1 is hit and they attempt to go in and retrieve survivors. They don't make it in. Tower 2 is hit and collapses with them stuck in between and without a clue of what's happening around them. Stone really does a good job of taking us in there with them and letting us feel their fear, confusion and dislocation. The rest of the movie alternates between the officers struggling to stay wake long enough under the rubble for anyone to find them and their wives (played very well by Maria Bello and Maggie Gyllenhaal) collapsing emotionally under a weight of uncertainty that hangs over them for nearly 24 hours. Of the 20 survivors pulled from the wreckage, McLoughlin and Jimeno would be numbers 18 and 19.

Stone has picked their story to tell despite being confronted with a number of different story options and people he could of focused on. It's not hard to see why he picked this as it's definitely the one that most represents the courage demonstrated that day, even if does seem kind of narrow in scope. I felt the beginning and end of the film fared much better than the middle portion which at times felt like a Lifetime movie of the week. It's here where the real problem of making a movie about September 11 comes to the forefront, a problem United 93 was clever enough to avoid. The events of that day are inherently emotional and uncomfortable for everyone, so when you depict that emotion onscreen beyond the actual events with big name actors giving nuanced performances you run the risk of exploiting it.

In a way, I kind of felt like I did watching Bobby last month when they interspersed real footage of Robert Kennedy within soap opera-like storylines featuring big name actors. In all fairness though, the casting here isn't nearly as atrocious and the actors all do fine, restrained work appropriate for the material. I am in no way implying Oliver Stone is trying to exploit this tragedy and I can see from the film his heart was in the right place, but I question if he chose the right means of presentation. He's as careful as possible to show everyone he's taking the high road (which he is) but I couldn't help thinking he was sugar coating the story a little bit and we know if there's one story that shouldn't be sugar coated it's this.

The middle section of the film, with the officers fighting for their survival and their wives at the verge of an emotional breakdown could really be out of any disaster movie. Therein lies the catch-22 where Stone must show the enormity of the situation, but anything he shows will pale in comparison to reality and minimize the event. That's why the real time documentary approach worked so well in United 93. It's just more tasteful and lets us draw our own conclusions instead of the filmmaker doing it for us. On the other hand, we already had that movie so Stone really had no choice but to do something different.

Even if it does feel like a disaster movie at least it's a good one that features excellent performances, especially from Cage. For the longest time Cage has been an actor who specializes in giving us wild performances in huge movies that we forget how well he can tone it down when necessary. While I question the decision to cast a major star in the role, if any American actor has to be leading us into the World Trade Center I really can't think of a better choice than Cage (although Tom Hanks would probably be able to pull it off too). The way he plays McLoughlin, as a good man and a strong leader, you get the impression had his mission not been cut short he would have saved many lives in there.

You may be able to question some of Stone's decisions (why is this PG-13? I think he has responsibility to show it as it happened), but you can't accuse him of not having respect for the families in making the picture. It helps that John McLoughlin and Michael Jimeno co-wrote it. There's none of Stone's trademark crazy editing style (employed in films like Natural Born Killers, JFK and Any Given Sunday) here and the only time he veers into classic Stone territory is a dream sequence involving Jesus and a somewhat controversial scene of officer Dominick Pezzulo (Jay Hernandez) taking his own life after being mortally wounded in the wreckage. They did not get the family's cooperation for this, so whether this happened or not is going to be up for speculation. Stone's inclusion of a stoic ex-marine who rescues the men (played exceptionally well by Michael Shannon) really hits the mark. I like how his sense of duty and determination was implied by his demeanor but never outright said.

World Trade Center isn't an unforgettable film like United 93, but a competent Hollywood version of what happened that day. After this, there's nowhere else to go with September 11th films. All the bases have been covered. You have to wonder though, what kind of a movie would we have had if the real Oliver Stone had shown up? By playing it safe, he may have unintentionally done that day and it's victims a greater disservice than if he had tried to exploit it.

United 93

Director: Paul Greengrass
Starring: Christian Clemenson, Cheyenne Jackson, Trish Gates, David Alan Basche, Polly Adams
Running Time: 111 minutes
Rating: R

**** (out of ****)

How do you even review a movie like this? I'm giving United 93 my highest rating yet find it difficult recommending anyone see it. It's painful and horrifying. I told myself going in I'd try to look at it objectively as a film without letting my thoughts or feelings on 9/11 influence my opinion. Minutes into the picture that approach was thrown out the window. The movie is frighteningly real as if it were shot by someone who was there, camcorder in hand. It's less a film than a claustrophobic historical account. There's nothing movieish or actorish about it as everything unfolds in real time and by all accounts pretty close to the 9/11 Commission's report on the crash of highjacked United Flight 93 onto a field just outside of Shanksville, Pennsylvania. It was the only one of four planes that didn't reach it's intended target that day.

This film alternates between what starts as an ordinary day at the National Air Traffic Control Center and and the passengers who are boarding Flight 93, including the four Arab men who plan to hijack the aircraft. We watch as the air traffic controllers attempt to keep track of all the allegedly hijacked planes that day and see them react as the as the World Trade Center is hit. Sadly, we see the government's ridiculously slow reaction time and inability to employ any aircraft to immediately deal with the situation. This isn't political propaganda though. It's true. By all accounts, this is how everything happened.

The terrorists are depicted as nameless, faceless nobodies and the passengers have no back stories at all. We know nothing about them. Deliberately, no name actors have been cast in any of the roles, further heightening the realism. The scariest part of the movie is the waiting. The waiting for it to happen. Watching the terrorists make it past security and the passengers go about their normal conversations completely unaware anything was going to happen was practically unbearable. A lot of time is spent at the beginning of the film in the air traffic control center and I think I know why. Besides giving us insight into how those on the ground handled the situation, it would have been too much for viewers to handle getting right into the situation of the hijacked flight. It's too jarring. We had to be eased into it.

When we're finally in the air there's more waiting. It becomes clear these terrorists really don't have much of a plan. They keep looking at each other wondering when it's the right time. They can never agree. The sloppiness of the situation only makes it scarier. There were points when I felt like screaming at the screen for them just to do it so it's over with. When it finally does happen some of the details are surprising. Like how the terrorists don't seem to care everyone's plotting and making phone calls. How they're in a panic the whole time unsure of what to do.

I, like many others, have always wondered how just a few guys with box cutters could possibly hijack a commercial aircraft. The film answers this question. They can and the passengers did absolutely everything in their power to stop it. We know how the story ends yet there's still tension as we realize the passengers were extremely close to escaping alive. We even learn one of them was even a pilot and ready to take over if they could break through into the cabin. We hear the phone calls the passengers make to their families right before they make the decision to take these guys down. You can hardly breathe the last twenty minutes of the film. There's no grandstanding or performances here. It feels like we're watching and hearing the real thing.

The film is disturbing but it's never offensive or exploitive. Clearly Greengrass put a lot of thought into how this was to be presented in a way that gives gravity to the situation without overdramatizing it. Less is more. It was the right direction to go in and the most respectful. This presents a straight forward take of what happened to Flight 93, but believe me that's more than enough. The debate will rage on whether it was too early to make a film about this, but at least it's one of high quality and noble intentions that doesn't attempt to sensationalize anything. There's a special feature on the disc that lets you watch interviews with family members of the doomed flight. Good luck drumming up the desire to see it. Watching the film is just about all anyone will be able to take.