Most people agree that the big film event of the year was “Barbenheimer”, one of the canniest accidental-on-purpose marketing strategies I’ve seen in my lifetime. Their combined success is pretty breathtaking, with Barbie grossing over a billion dollars and Oppenheimer likely to cross that mark soon enough (incredible for a historical biopic). But what of their artistic worth? That will likely take a few more years to unpack, once the excitement and “hot takes” have died down. Me, I suspect the lustre of both will fade. Barbie is a fun film, with some big laughs and enthusiastic performances. But though I applaud Greta Gerwig for her efforts, I don’t think the charm of her earlier, smaller-budget films is quite translated into the mega-budget film arena. It made my list because fun, no matter how compromised, deserves to be acknowledged, but it’s unlikely to remain a favourite – the sloppily written parts really do compromise it.
As for Oppenheimer, well… Christopher Nolan is a good director. Of SPECTACLE. I think he’s a bad director of PEOPLE. The characters in his films only know how to interact in grandiose ways – I don’t think Nolan understands, or is interested in, the complexity of real-life humans and their interactions. Despite being a biography of a real-life, extremely complex human being, I don’t think Oppenheimer is any exception to that. There are some astonishing set pieces, which everyone is still talking about, and I admire it for that. The editing is dazzling. But I finished the film feeling I knew little more about Oppenheimer than the little I already knew, as well as baffled by why Nolan felt the last hour of interminable hearings was necessary to help us understand him – why was his loss of security clearance such a big deal, to Oppenheimer or to us? It wasn’t made at all clear. So all that remained were editing tricks and an ever-present Ludwig Göransson score insisting oh-so-loudly that everything happening onscreen was VERY IMPORTANT ACTUALLY. Overall I think it’s a visual marvel, but a bad biography, and a mediocre entertainment. Not good enough for an ostensible film-of-the-year.
For spectacle, I’ll take the latest Mission Impossible instalment over it, a suspense ride that has as little interest in people as Nolan, but zips along with impressive momentum where Oppenheimer chases its own tail in circles. Plus it delivers better set pieces along the way. But what do I know? I much preferred it to last year’s Top Gun sequel, and it did worse at the box office. Perplexing.
I’ll also take Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon, which some complained was too long, but I believe as a representation of one of the darkest chapters in American history wasn’t long enough – some of the historical context around the exploitation of the Osage by white businessmen (read: gangsters) got lost in the narrative thrust. But that narrative thrust made it very compelling, and as a journey into America’s heart of darkness painted with demonic visuals and performances, it struck me as another late-career triumph for Scorsese.
I was delighted to share my favourite film of the year with most publications this year, for the first time perhaps since Moonlight. Past Lives is not a perfect film, with some issues in the script department that betray Celine Song’s status as a debutante in writing-for-film (she worked in theatre previously). But it’s unbelievably good as an example of expressing below-the-surface-emotions visually, via background detail, camera placement, setting, an actors’ body language, etc., so that it did not at all betray Celine Song’s status as a debutante in directing-for-film. It was, in fact, the best directing I saw all year – subtle, plus visually and emotionally rich. Now it just remains to be seen if she can build on all that in future films, which might not necessarily be able to mine her own life experience for inspiration (the same goes for last year’s similar knockout autobiographical debut, Charlotte Wells’ Aftersun).
Here’s to another year of brilliant surprises.
(MAJOR CAVEAT: To my great dismay, I was unable to watch The Boy and the Heron in time for this list, because it hasn’t been released where I live. I’m a huge Studio Ghibli fan, and believe Hayao Miyazaki is one of the top four Japanese directors of all time (which puts him alongside Akira Kurosawa, Yasujiro Ozu, and Kenji Mizoguchi… whew!), so there is a high likelihood that it would’ve made this list. I may come back to change the list when I finally see it.)
1: Past Lives (dir. Celine Song)
Universally beloved debut feature, based on the director’s own past life/lives, that totally involves you in the childhood romance spanning into adulthood of a Korean man, a Korean woman who emigrates with her family to America, and the American man who becomes a third point in their love triangle by becoming her husband. Like a master filmmaker, Celine Song knows exactly where to place the camera to maximise audience emotional engagement and interest. Also like a master filmmaker, she fills the outskirts of each frame with a mise-en-scène that unobtrusively comments on the centred action: out-of-focus features like a random couple making out on the waterfront, a carousel spinning around like the thoughts of childhood in their head, etc., are crucial for working out what is not being said between Greta Lee and Teo Yoo. It helps that those actors are so superb at letting you into their secret lives – John Magaro as the husband too, whose central bedroom scene changes the dynamic of the film in a fascinating way, questioning the narrative and reframing it to allow for even more sympathy for him (we already like him quite a bit). But their skilled performances can also be credited to Celine Song’s empathetic direction as well. Believe the hype: everybody loves it for a reason.
2: May December (dir. Todd Haynes)
I’ve seen mixed reactions to this striking tale of a child abuse victim (Charles Melton) who marries his abuser (Julianne Moore) after she’s released from prison and raises a family with her, and the actress (Natalie Portman) who comes to study them in order to play her in a film. Mixed reactions are of course inevitable for a film so tonally strange: despite the uncomfortable subject matter, quite a few scenes are played for laughs. Me, I laughed at all the jokes (the “we’re out of hot dogs” line followed by dramatic music especially), cried inside at all the inner devastation laid bare (Charles Melton’s “graduation” to realising that all the women in his life have been abusing him especially), and laughed and cried inside at the same time during some scenes, such as when father and son smoke weed together on the roof (goofy, for sure, but combined with Melton’s “graduation” to realising that his actions in life might’ve accidentally fucked up his kid’s future). This film is many other things besides, including an essay on the mercilessness of actors, the vampirish way they observe and steal other’s personas for their own benefit. It all works like hell for me – but then I’m a huge fan of Persona and Mulholland Dr., and it appears that Haynes used those female-identity-blurring films to inspire this, perhaps his best one yet.
3: Killers of the Flower Moon (dir. Martin Scorsese)
A tale of American Evil in its purest form: the true story of the murder of Osage tribe members for their oil money in the early 20th century becomes a parable for all the evil committed by white Americans against indigenous populations before and since. Yet whilst evil in Scorsese’s older films was loud, aggressive, and in-your-face, with this and The Irishman, evil has instead become quiet, unflashy, and banal. Just as Robbie Robertson’s score hovers softly in the background for most of the movie, so does the presence of terrible evil, so that we gradually become accustomed to it; it becomes a fact of life as we’re watching. Until we’re confronted with Lily Gladstone, that is: a force and presence so strong that all of the characters in the film, plus the film’s very own director, and all of the non-Osage people in the audience, when faced with her are forced to confront their own complicity in her suffering, and the suffering of her people. She helps this to become an essential reckoning with the fundamental evil of America. There are many other outstanding performances besides, including career-best work from DiCaprio (it’s so difficult to depict stupidity without overdoing it or appearing condescending, but he nails it), and late-career-best work from De Niro (as the murderer who always comes with a smile).
4: The Fabelmans (dir. Steven Spielberg)
That the origin story of the world’s most successful film director fared so poorly at the box office (except for in France, the birthplace of cinema no less) shows that still, for most people, “art” is not a drug; they want entertainment instead. That’s fair enough and totally understandable, but those of us for whom the idea of art, making it and appreciating it, is a drug should be able to appreciate the complexity of how it’s scrutinised in this film. Art not only uncovers uncomfortable truths for Spielberg’s alter ego and other sensitive characters in his orbit, but it is also used as a means to smother those same truths. The spirit of John Ford is all over this, not least in showing how film’s printing of legends, time and time again, has managed to paradoxically uncover truths about themselves for attentive viewers. We often see ourselves in cinema’s artifice – but not always how we’d like to be seen. This is a penetrating film, decidedly mixed about whether the “magic” of cinema compensates for the great harm it can cause. That ambivalence, however, just makes the ending seem all the more genuinely magical: one of the best things Spielberg has ever done.
5: Anatomy of a Fall (dir. Justine Triet)
From the stark clash of the snowy alps and the blared steel-drum “P.I.M.P.” in the opening scene onwards, this is really a study of a terrible martial clash and breakdown disguised as a murder mystery. It’s also a disturbing account of one boy, who’s literally visually impaired, learning the terrible implications of the fact that we can never really know or understand what we can’t see. It’s not clear to him or us whether his mother killed his father – so we have to rely on composed narratives, guesswork, leaps of faith… or dogs instead. Ridiculously gripping and controlled until very near the end, where it seems to me that the film wants us to “see” a happy ending, despite the profound uncertainty beforehand as to whether certain characters deserve it. Nevertheless, the performances are as towering as the alpine peaks, including from the little boy.
6: The Eternal Daughter (dir. Joanna Hogg)
Writer’s block in an isolated hotel leads to “visions” and madness: this is The Shining but done with posh British people, which means there’s mildly ruffled feathers instead of axe-murdering. Joanna Hogg has a lot of fun playing with horror tropes and clichés in this semi-sequel to The Souvenir films, and Tilda Swinton has a lot of fun improvising with none other than Tilda Swinton, in the film’s first half. Swinton plays both mother and daughter, holidaying in the north of Wales in a house-turned-hotel that the mother used to live in. Creepily, Swinton often blurs the lines between the mannerisms of the two. Is the daughter turning into the mother, or the other way around? There are several crushing scenes involving the daughter’s realisation of how a certain big life choice has caused her mother, unintentionally, very great sadness – extremely well-played on both sides by Tilda Swinton – which upends the creepiness and turns this into a typically involving chamber piece character drama from Hogg. But the ever-creeping fog, the dark hallways, the sinister music, the Gothic architecture, and the slanted camera angles are all straight out of the Classic Hollywood Horror playbook, and the film is all the richer for them.
7: TÁR (dir. Todd Field)
You’ve probably heard about this one. In case you haven’t, Cate Blanchett plays a world-famous conductor who… Well, any more would be ruining the game. Talking about games, I must admit that not being a gamer, I had to look up the meaning of the film’s final scene. If you haven’t seen this film yet, you might be baffled by that sentence, which shows just how strong and surprising the ending is. It’s joined by a few other “what the hell…?” moments that steer this film away from the campy self-parody category. Whilst the film is too slow in its first half, it does set up a shift from adagio to allegro pacing in the second half, which works like a mouse trap snapping shut, and works very well. Is Cate Blanchett’s Tár the mouse or the trap? The film plays cleverly with the audience’s expectations about this, providing Blanchett with plenty of opportunity to flex her overacting muscles, including in a few egregiously overcooked scenes. But it’s the subtlety of the jokes that you’ll remember – the way that Mahler’s Symphony “No. 5”, which was to be the crown jewel of Lydia Tár’s career, comes to haunt her in a most unexpected way in a South-East Asian brothel, for instance.
8: Roald Dahl Anthology (dir. Wes Anderson)
I’ve seen a few end-of-year lists that have Asteroid City on them, but I don’t think I’ve seen any with any of the four other films Wes Anderson released this year, on Netflix (The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar, The Swan, The Rat Catcher, and Poison). I guess they’ve been overlooked because they’re all short films; if they’d been released as one anthology film, would it then have been correctly recognised by more critics as the best work that Anderson has done since The Grand Budapest Hotel? For Roald Dahl’s stories prove once again a perfect match for Anderson’s whimsy (yes, I had to use that word). By having characters narrate their actions straight to the camera, Wes Anderson dials up the self-conscious theatricality of his work even more than usual, and the results are sometimes fantastically funny (when the Great Yogi turns over his stool to make it look like he’s levitating in The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar), sometimes surprisingly moving (the gentle sorrow in Ralph Fiennes’ eyes, as he narrates the ending to shocking bullying narrative The Swan, in one of the few moments of emotional nakedness in Wes Anderson’s filmography). Anderson for the most part maintains his pastel colour imagery and light, whimsical air, but goes suddenly off into horror territory (Ralph Fiennes’ physical transformation in The Rat Catcher) and macabre acts of violence (The Swan). He even manages to capture the full weight of colonialism’s horrors in the best of the anthology, Poison, which forces Benedict Cumberbatch into deeply unpleasant The Power of the Dog mode, and is filled with suspense the whole way through (before unleashing its venom in a way you weren’t expecting). Despite my knowledge of the dark undertones to much of Roald Dahl’s writing, and some of Wes Anderson’s filmmaking, I wasn’t prepared for these anthology films to be so upsetting. I give Wes Anderson full credit for not flinching from Dahl’s darkness, whilst keeping his slick entertainment machine still running.
9: Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret. (dir. Kelly Freeman Craig)
It’s something of a minor miracle that the only things that are twee and lame about this adaptation of the 1970 Judy Blume novel, about the growing pains of a group of 11 year old girls in New Jersey, are the Hans Zimmer score and a few of the too-neatly wrapped-up moments at the end. Elsewhere, the girls’ growing pains are communicated with remarkable effectiveness by the script and by the performances of the young actresses, who chant “We must! We must! We must increase our bust!” with the feral desperation of girls who feel their lives must depend on it. That the story ties body and self-confidence issues in with the growing pains of an American society still caught up in religious civil warfare, shown via the competing Christian and Jewish family members in Margaret’s life, makes the film all the more impressive as a portrait of its time (and our time – these growing pains continue on). You can feel that God’s silence, his lack of answering her prayers, is as exasperating to Margaret as her flat chest and failure to start her period – that it’s every bit as exasperating to her as it was to Ingmar Bergman. That’s strong stuff. Rachel McAdams and Kathy Bates also shine in strongly written roles as mother and grandmother, though the male roles, including Benny Safdie as the Jewish father, are underwritten. Never mind – this was a book proudly written for and about pre-teen girls, and the film follows that path equally loudly and proudly. Good for the film, and good for everyone involved.
10: All the Beauty and the Bloodshed (dir. Laura Poitras)
She’s tackled controversial subjects before (Edward Snowden, Julian Assange), but here documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras turns to a subject that everyone can admire and love (well, everyone that matters): famed photographer and political activist Nan Goldin. It weaves together a dual narrative with skill. Roughly half of the film details Nan Goldin’s life story, from a tragedy-stricken childhood, to her rise as a prominent experimental photographer in the queer New York scene of the 70s and 80s, to the death of many of her friends and photographic subjects from AIDs. The other half shows her in the present day, leading an activist group called P.A.I.N. (Prescription Addiction Intervention Now) as they try to tackle the wealth and influence of the Sackler family, who became billionaires off the back of the highly addictive and often lethal prescription drug Oxycontin, and are overwhelmingly responsible for the opioid addiction crisis in America. Their campaign, targeting the prestigious museums and art galleries around the world who accepted donations and named wings for the Sackler family, is so successful, it has to be seen to be believed. Luckily you can see it here. The two halves of the film don’t seem to connect until the very end, where a key biographical detail reveals where Nan Goldin got her rebellious spirit from. At any rate, all of it is worth watching, not only to witness Goldin’s indomitable spirit, but also to witness the care with which Poitras has put the interviews, archive footage, and photographs from some of Goldin’s collections together.
11: How to Have Sex (dir. Molly Manning Walker)
Really excellent feature-length debut for director Molly Manning Walker. At first the three girls we follow who go on a post-exams holiday to the party resort of Malia just seem like typical teenagers: quite annoying to watch, hyperactive and full of inane chatter. But we are made to really care about one of them called Tara, played superbly by Mia McKenna-Bruce, as her insecurities are revealed to us and also are shown to be preyed on in the most foul, evil way possible by one of the “lads” they meet in an adjacent hotel room. There are a few contrivances that are a bit much, such as the “lads” having in their group a butch lesbian, just for the lesbian in the girls’ group to get with. But overall, this is very authentic-feeling about what teenagers are like on these sort of booze-n’-sex party holidays, and the close-up heavy camerawork cleverly makes the looming threat of over-pushy men at these places appear all the more intimidating.
12: Joyland (dir. Saim Sadiq)
Initially banned in Pakistan for depicting the country’s trans community, this turns out to be not a daring act of cinematic transgression but an Ozu-like family drama about two married brothers living with their disabled father that are trying to support their families. The trans character, played by Alina Khan, is really a supporting role, though Khan plays her with enough domineering force that she manages to seize control of the narrative, just as she seizes the attention of the younger brother (played calmly, like a cool breeze to Khan’s cyclone, by Ali Junejo). Lucky that debut director Saim Sadiq has the compassion of Ozu, so that his family drama makes a bid to understand all of the elements within the family, plus all of the participants in the love triangle that emerges as a threat to the familial structure. Sadiq stoops to melodrama more than Ozu, and only the use of colour and lighting in some scenes demonstrates a true cinematic sensibility. But this is a strong debut, one that needles its way under the surface of Pakistan’s society, to show the depressing burden of patriarchal and masculine expectations on sensitive souls.
13: Return to Seoul (dir. Davy Chou)
Park Ji-min gives perhaps the best performance I’ve seen all year as Freddie, a Korean adopted in France who returns to her “homeland” to find her birth parents. Incredibly, it’s her acting debut. Hard, cool, vulnerable; both attentive to and dismissive of people; she gives off so many contradictory vibes, yet Park Ji-min manages to make Freddie feel like a whole person, even when the film’s ruthless structure keeps jumping forward several years at a time. This does make it feel disjointed and hard work to keep up with. But that suits Freddie’s character, who threatens to ditch the men in her life at the snap of a finger, just as she was abandoned at the snap of a finger as a baby by her birth parents. The film keeps snapping its fingers; she keeps disappearing from our view for years at a time. The lesson is one about the fragility of human relationships, and it’s a haunting one.
14: Passages (dir. Ira Sachs)
A gay film director (Franz Rogowski) cheats on his husband (Ben Whishaw) with a young woman (Adèle Exarchopoulos) in Paris, which is only the native city for one of this surprising love triangle. That premise and the actor lineup should be enough to secure your interest in this already – if you’ve been following the art film world for the last decade or so, that is. If not, imagine if you will a scene where Franz Rogowski turns up late, on a rusty old bicycle and in a see-through crop top, for his first meeting with the young lady’s French parents. It’s 1000x funnier than anything in “Meet the Parents”. The film takes on this man going through an identity crisis, never forgetting the hurt that he causes others in his “explorations”: by making Rogowski a film director, is Ira Sachs admitting that this is something of a confessional? It doesn’t matter: the results are too entertaining to care about the extent to which it’s autobiography.
15: You Hurt My Feelings (dir. Nicole Holofcener)
Suitable that this stars legend of the small screen Julia Louis-Dreyfus, because it’s shot very much like a TV comedy-drama, with a simple camera set-up designed to best capture the actors’ faces. Also because, like Seinfeld, the film ends with no lessons learnt: the characters still telling each other multiple white lies a day, just to simply get by in life, and not risk offending other people. That’s the theme of the film: the white lies we tell, even to our families, and the unintended pain these can cause when unveiled. It’s kind of amazing to me that nobody before has really attempted to tackle that concept – it’s probably a big part of everyone’s lives. Yet here it is, if not perfectly executed, then perfectly conceived.
16: Elemental (dir. Peter Sohn)
Not widely loved, but I thought the concept of this, a world where elements can interact with each other, was one of the most fully-realised in Pixar’s recent catalogue. What’s more, there’s an unashamed romance at its centre, between a “fire element” girl and a “water element” boy, that might be Pixar’s sweetest since WALL-E. The scene where the two travel in an air bubble in a flooded station to view “Vivisteria flowers” is a magical, phantasmagorical animation sequence, like Aladdin’s “Whole New World” in an even more fantastical realm. And the couple’s dilemma, the fear that they can’t touch without harming one another, has exciting parallels to Frozen and Elsa’s dilemma: fear over intimacy with others is clearly the allegorical subtext in both cases. There’s another subtext as well, though less subtle: the fears about “elements” mixing in a big city is a commentary on America’s recent arguments over immigration (director Peter Sohn himself grew up in an immigrant family in 1970s New York). Like all recent Pixar films, it could do with a lighter touch and some more gags, but it’s nevertheless a poignant experience.
17: Saint Omer (dir. Alice Diop)
I was a bit taken aback at first because it was not what I was expecting – I’d been led by comparisons to Anatomy of a Fall to expect a similarly gripping legal drama. Instead, this slow-moving film, shot in long static shots, prefers to put some distance between itself and the audience’s expectations. It concerns a Senegalese immigrant studying in France who is appearing in court charged with the murder of her 15-month old child – which she doesn’t deny, but pleads Not Guilty to anyway, on the basis that she was the victim of witchcraft. It’s also about a writer and academic who comes to watch the trial, with the aim to write about it, but due to certain secrets gets more personally involved in the case than is probably healthy. It’s mostly a discourse on motherhood, about the connecting tissue that unites all mothers and daughters across the world; its interest in the court case tends to ebb and flow. So Anatomy of a Fall it ain’t (despite also being French and largely set in court). Well-made and surprising in its construction it is – just don’t expect a clear-cut ending.
18: Barbie (dir. Greta Gerwig)
Respect to Greta Gerwig for maintaining her trademark style (witty, fast-paced, full of smart talk) in a mainstream setting, and with such an unlikely subject. Respect also to the cast, who as in all of her movies, seem to be having so much fun. Less respect, a lot less respect, for the Mattel subplot, which panders to that company’s “feminist” view of itself, via Will Ferrell’s dim but likeable CEO who insists money isn’t everything (the film includes a few soft blows, as if the company wanted to prove they could take a joke). I was also a little disappointed by elements of the script, which drags in places, especially towards the end, and deals in too many platitudes. But that’s only when it’s not dealing in wit, which it has in spades. Love the colours, sets, hair, make-up, costumes, general world-building as well. Life in plastic? It’s fantastic. Dialogue in plastic? The jury’s still out.
19: Marcel the Shell With Shoes On (dir. Dean Fleischer Camp)
Inquisitive and charming, yet coated in a hard shell metaphorically as well as literally, Marcel is one of the most likeable screen characters in recent years. His charm, embodied by Jenny Slate’s voice performance, helps to propel the film through its weaker patches – as with Pixar’s films, I sometimes feel myself resistant to its blatant attempts to yank water from my tear ducts. Yet there’s meaning here: it’s a film about stubbornness, about resistance to change, and about documentary filmmaker’s reluctance to expose themselves, about the way they try to hide behind their subjects – as if going into a shell. The animation is cute, too.
20: Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One (dir. Christopher McQuarrie)
The first 45 minutes or so and the last 45 minutes or so are the most fun I’ve had in a blockbuster film in quite some time: action sequences choreographed with joy and suspense (and humour – at one point Tom Cruise crashes through a train window at so precisely the right moment, it counts as an impeccable display of comic timing on the editing team’s part). In between there’s a lull, including some noodling about in Venice that would require an affection for the characters that we don’t have in order to work. But fans know it’s not the script or acting (though Simon Pegg is very watchable) that matter in this franchise, it’s the set pieces and stunts, and on those fronts this one delivers the goods. Plus, in having AI as the villain, it may prove to be the most prescient action film of its era.