ErikJ972's top ten films of 2003.- Page 2

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/9/04 at 1:38pm

popculture - I was quite amazed with Love Actually. I expected it to be a typical schmaltzy romantic comedy, but walked away feeling it was much more. And I thought Martine was particularly good in it. I wanted to see more of her. The multiple storylines didn't bother me at all. It wasn't like it was Altman or Anderson with huge amounts of stories happening. Why does it necessarily have to be realistic? What romantic comedy film is realistic? I found it to be quite romantic and fun, but still poignant in dealing with Emma and Laura's stories. What did you mean by simplistic and stupid direction? I felt the story was told well, the characters clearly defined and all stories well-balanced. I'm not sure what type of film you thought it would be.

What about Jeepers Creepers scared you? I practically slept through it. Nothing in it made me want to see the sequel. It was standard cookie-cutter made-for-video teen slasher flick.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 1/9/04 at 3:03pm

In Love Actually, I wish they had cut out the porn couple storyline and given that time to the other stories.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/9/04 at 5:34pm

I actually loved House of Sand and Fog too. It just missed making my list. And I thought Kinglsy was fantastic. There better be an Oscar nomination in his future.
Obviously I disagree with the criticisms of Big Fish. One thing I really liked about the movie is the seperate stories were not overly sentimental. They were presented in a "this is what happened fashion." I also thought Albert Finney gave an knock out performance. And I have to say a movie ending has not touched me like that since ET flew away in his big spaceship when I was ten years old...

I forgot to add one thing to my list.

ERIKJ972'S WORST MOVIE OF THE YEAR!
Elephant

[tkts]

Posted: 1/9/04 at 5:56pm

I watched the first two Lord of the Rings movies and my only thought was that I had just watched a live action video game. The scenes moved from one level to another, getting progressively harder for the characters to get out of.

Admittedly, I did not read the books. My brother in law did read the books and thinks the movies are the greatest things since sliced bread. When part three comes on HBO, I'll watch it, if I have time to kill.

Updated On: 1/9/04 at 05:56 PM

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 1/9/04 at 6:43pm

Just saw 'Big Fish.' Liked but wasn't overwhelmed. I know it was sort of the theme (sort of) but it just seems Burton really struggles with real world filmmaking and characters. Those scenes seemed particularly strained, not helped by Crudup's stillborn performance.

Wish Alison Loman would have had more to do. It's uncanny how much she does look like a young Jessica Lange.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 12:33am

Even though I pretty much gave up on movies this year (out of frustration) I drew up a list to see if I even had 10 good ones that I saw that were released in 2003. When I threw in an Imax movie, I did have ten. And these are they (although depending on mood and day I would probably shift the order around):

1. Km0 (Kilometro Cero) [Virtually unseen polysexual sex comedy from Spain... find it and see it!]
2. 28 Days Later
3. Camp
4. School of Rock
5. Stuck on You [HUGELY underrated, hilarious scene from "Tru" included]
6. Die, Mommie, Die!
7. Capturing the Friedmans
8. Ghosts of the Abyss
9. The Italian Job
10. Hable con Ella (Talk to Her)

Runners up: Finding NEmo. Bruce Almighty.

I saw no films involving Hobbits or George Lucas or anything like that.

Can I have my money back, please: Kill Bill, Vol. Whocares? (Okay, it was a screening, but could I have my popcorn money back?) I wouldn't mind getting my cash back for Dirty Pretty Things. Please. You know you're in trouble when you figure it out a quarter of the way through but you know that your guess on the ending can't be right if it's that obvious.

Updated On: 1/10/04 at 12:33 AM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 1:09am

i am just confounded that with all the literate and intelligent folks we have here that no one has listed "bubba ho-tep" in their top ten. tsk, tsk.

for all your perusal, i add this link and suggest that you see what was released and what made money in 2003...shocking

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/index2003.html

Updated On: 1/10/04 at 01:09 AM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 2:34am

Elephant--I haven't seen it yet, but from what I have seen it is definitely the love it or hate it film of the year. Apparently along with Big Fish. =) (which I felt lukewarm about, too--and I love love love Tim Burton)

I'm really amazed at all of the anti-LOTR on here--but maybe it just isn't this crowd.

In America--might be my fav film of the year. Not sure yet, and still need to see some stuff.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 10:04am

My problem with Elephant was that it seemed like a neverending Abercrombie and Fitch commercial that was nicely shot but had nothing to say. I know Van Sant said he didn't want the film to offer any answers. The problem is the film also didn't raise any questions that haven't been raised before. It didn't give the viewer anything to think about...a big mistake for a film that takes on the subject of Columbine. (Spoiler)The only scene I liked was when the camera followed the three girls talking after lunch and they all went into the girls room and threw up. Working in a high school I know that Bulemia is a huge unadressed dirty little secret and I found it refreshing that this movie brought it briefly into the light. But no other such insight was offered.
Namo and John, glad to see you both liked 28 days later. It's funny, I thought that was the one I was going to get blasted for the most. A zombie flick on your top 10??? But what a great zombie flick it was.
A lot of the other films mentioned here I loved. Loved In America. Loved School of Rock, but Elf beat it out just for the amount of laughs. Unfortunatley I haven't had the chance to see bubba-ho yet.
And Namo...I adored Talk to Her, but technically that was a 2002 film and you would find that very near the top of my list from last year.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 10:21am

I loved 28 Days Later! It was so much more than a zombie flick. But as you said, a damn fine zombie flick.

I included Talk to Her, because I swear it didn't play near me until 2003. I also didn't see The Hours til January, even though it opened on 12/27/03. So I snuck in the Almodovar on a technicality!

I also have nothing against the Tolkien stuff. I loved The Hobbit. It's just that I resist these movies that become so huge because with their pop-culture saturation I feel as if I have seen them even though I haven't. I'm intrigued by the whole split Gollum personality and would love to see that someday. (By the way, Peter Jackson's Heavenly Creatures is one of my favorite films of all time.)

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 10:28am

I LOVED Heavenly Creatures. Just got a really great deal on the DVD at Best Buy. Can't wait to watch it again.
I know what you mean about the phenom surrounding LOTR and how it can damper your enjoyment of it. Film is one of my passions so if I start to see that building around a movie I want to see I try to ignore it. I put off reading anything about ROTK until after I saw the movie. But when it comes down to it the films are a modern day classic epic. Great story, beautifully shot, and masterfully directed. One of the things that amazes me is the true independent spirit in which these films were made. New Line took an extraordinary risk having all three of these films shot at the same time. If the first one tanked, that would have been the end of New Line. It's rare that you see that kind of risk taking in the film business.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 10:46am

Erik: Amen, amen, amen, re ELEPHANT.

I've never been so put off by such tripe. It's Van Sant's wet dream, but it says zip about Columbine, sociologically or otherwise, and as you opine, doesn't even ask questions. (Except one big one: If you shower with your best friend on the day you're going to blow away a whole school of peers, and then kiss him, do you finish the deed? In other words, if suicide is at the end of your day anyway, do you worry about being a homo?) Where is the gay activist backlash against this obscene little opus? It is shamefully shallow, and ultimately pointless.

Remember "snuff" films? This is a "'Nuff!" film.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 2:16pm

I am SO GLAD it's not just me when it comes to Elephant. I was so so so bored by it. The acting was terrible and when we had sat through the interminable tracking shots to get to the final horror of the school shootings, it was just ridiculous. One of the biggest disappointments of last year. And it opens in London at the end of the month. There is no escape.

And as for Love Actually, yes, he was TRYING to go for a romantic Short Cuts, but Richard Curtis was seemingly blind to the fact that Robert Altman had been making films of that scope for years and this was his directorial debut. He would have been wiser to go for something on a much smaller scale, but he chose to bite off way more than he could chew and he massively overegged the pudding into the bargain. And while I am all for the suspension of disbelief, I have my limits and moments like the Prime Minister knocking on all the doors in the street to find his tea lady and singing Christmas carols to small children made me cringe so badly. What would have worked much better there would have been a protracted hunt for her address with his staff all getting on his case about why he wanted it. The porn couple just did not need to be there, they added nothing and went nowhere and they were linked to nobody. The farcical moments like those I just mentioned didn't work when they were mixed in with moments of emotion like Emma Thompson realising Alan Rickman was cheating on her. And can anyone here tell me they thought the scene in the American bar was a success? I wanted to throw things at this point. It was so facile it beggared belief. And that score. Hateful. WAY too prominently featured and way too sickly sweet and drippy. I found myself grateful that I wasn't diabetic. And Martine McCutcheon (among others) was AWFUL. Almost the whole cast just seemed to be walking through it. I think I am done now. And it's coming to something when I hate a film this much and it doesn't make it into my Bottom 10. 2003 was not a good year for movies.

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 6:32pm

Yes, I couldn't believe how the high artistic standards of the first 'Jeepers Creepers' were bastardized in the second, clearly inferior, chapter of the saga. Perhaps 'Jeepers Creepers: Return of the King' will restore the trilogy to its rightful place among the hierarchy of great films.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 1/10/04 at 10:45pm

Ohhhhh, John Popa, getting coy are we?? =)

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 1/11/04 at 12:13am

personally i'm waiting with baited (hehehe) breath for jeepers creepers 4: creep harder.

[orion59]

Posted: 1/11/04 at 9:20am

If you want to see a fantastic movie, forget the big blockbusters and go see Monster. This is a well written, intriguing story. The acting is phenominal. Charlize theron plays against her usual, beautiful engenue type to play a lower class, uneducated lesbian prostitute. She captures every nuance of the character and makes her so muliti dimensional. The transformation she went through to play the part is also fantastic. You would never know that it's her. I went to see it yesterday and was completely enrapt in this film from beginning to end.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/12/04 at 1:02pm

popcultureboy - I guess it's safe to say I feel pretty much the exact opposite about Love Actually. I found it to be warm and charming and the performances spot-on. A much better romantic comedy than the awful Down With Love. I can't think of a better romantic comedy released last year. The closest would be How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days.