Great list. It's nice to finally see Brokeback Mountain break into somebody's top ten around here.
Good addition to the group, his taste in movies seems to be very different from the others. It's makes the site more well-rounded.Although the majority of his top ten would be nowhere near my top 10, the reasons he gives are very solid. In a few instances I even found myself rethinking the way I feel about those movies. Nicely done.-Robbie
Agreed, that's why we adopted the lad. His taste is very different, but he brings something new, just like John Foote brings a different style of writing. It's like a sports team making a few big free agent signings...
Thanks for the comments all around. I greatly enjoy all of the positive encouragement and feedback, but I always enjoy any feedback, as it's great to hear from readers. I also am grateful that it looks like people did close readings, which is always nice. Robbie - I appreciate your comments about my thoughts. I've heard similar things from several other people, and while I'm well aware that for better or worse many of my picks may be far from other critic's list (in response to JOSH, I'm proud to be carrying the Brokeback Banner anywhere I go), so I figured by defending myself well I could avoid shame and ridicule. I believe there's a feature coming to the Circuit soon (post-Oscars I think) to allow more interaction between staff and readers. I don't want to share anything else without Clayton's permission, but since it looks like you'd be very respectful (which is weird to find on the internet, huh?) I love to take the opportunity to not only hear more of your thoughts on my picks but also hear what your choices are.I hope everyone is enjoying a wonderful season of filmgoing and I'm working on some stuff for the Circuit that I can't wait to share with you all soon. In the meantime, please keep an eye out for Jack-In-the-Box Office appearing on the blog tomorrow (Sunday).Cheers,Jackson
Very well-said about "The Hours."I also thoroughly enjoyed that film because the actresses reincarnated the book's characters so accurately; especially Julianne Moore. In the book, Moore's character is introduced as a woman who subtly expresses herself without speaking----Julianne Moore conveyed that subtelity perfectly in each scene and she never hit a false note. (I met her--heh).The score was another thing I loved. .Phillip Glass was able to use the piano to articulate emotions and the movie's endearing theme---"living with feelings of discontent." Heh....I can spend all day talking about this film and the book's author because both are my personal favorites.Anyway, welcome to Awards Circuit, Jackson.
Nigel - I couldn't agree more with everything you said. I someday hope to be able to meet Julianne Moore myself, as she's one of my favorite actresses. If I had made the article any longer (I felt it was long enough as it was) I would have talked more about her, as she's in two films on my top ten and "Far From Heaven" is also on my top 50 list. Thanks for the comments and the welcome, and again have a wonderful Awards season.Cheers,Jackson
This comment has been removed by the author.
hmmm. Oscars are known for what I like to call "pleasant surprises"Starting with Julia Roberts' win, Sean Penn's victory (despite the love for Rourke), Reese Witherspoon's win (despite Felicity's strong buzz, plus the validation she had earned from the Emmy Academy)....et cetera.....Here's to hoping Julianne Moore is this year's "pleasant surprise" in the supporting actress category.....despite all that well-deserved love for Monique.I know most people would rather see one of the Reitman girls up for the prize....but I want Moore--->(no pun intended lol).
FYI, it never became "cool" to hate The Curious Case of Benjamin Button...it became sensible. When a film's fans have to act as apologists for it, you know there's something wrong with it.
I still enjoy Benjamin Button and think it's a very good, if flawed, film, but that's just me...There's nothing wrong with people who enjoy a film defending it, everyone does that with the films they like. Someone defending the merits of Gigli is as much in the right as someone defending the merits of Casablanca...
True, but when a fan is asked why they like a particular film, red flags should go up when their *first* instinct is to go on the defensive against the criticisms laid against it.Many Benjamin Button lovers (not all, but many) wouldn't talk about the merits of Fincher's film nearly as much as trying to explain away its plodding pace, similarities to Forrest Gump, tedious portentousness, frustrating passivity of the titular character, obvious ethnic stereotypes and subtle (but no less reprehensible) misogyny, numerous subplots and asides that had almost no narrative significance, and failure of any of its characters to acknowledge the amazing condition that Benjamin had...usually by throwing condescending insults at people like me who just didn't "get it." I'm not grouping you with those fans, but that was the confounding experience I had during last year's Oscar season, and comments like "It became 'cool' to dislike Benjamin Button" peeves me to no end.Taking your example of Casablanca, you don't hear fans of that film say things like "Haters accuse the film of ____, ____, and ____, but they're just not smart enough to interpret it the right way, which is ______." Casablanca is a great film that doesn't need a defense because it stands up to scrutiny, whereas The Curious Case of Benjamin Button does not.
Except to someone who thinks Casablanca is a terrible film, then it doesn't stand up to scrutiny in their eyes, just like Benjamin Button doesn't to you. There's nothing more subjective to taste then film. No one is ever right and no one is ever wrong...
You're missing my point. When I (or just about anyone else) talk about Casablanca, I'm not going to open my thoughts on the film by attacking those who hated it, mainly because their critisms never pointed out anything that tarnished the movie in the eyes of the general moviegoing public. Those who thought Casablanca was terrible aren't necessarily "wrong" in an objective sense, but they do have an uphill battle facing them in a critical discussion. The same cannot be said of Jackson Truax and Benjamin Button. Now, I will admit that there are plenty of films that are initially dismissed (which one really can't say about Fincher's film, since it garnered a whopping 13 Oscar nominations) but later seen as classics. But a movie like, say, The Night of the Hunter overcomes that situation not by having rabid fans dismiss the problems with it and repeating the film's Oscar press kit, but by having its aesthetic strengths naturally overcome the initial misunderstanding by critics and the general public.Truax is entitled to his opinion, obviously, and I may end up being wrong about Button and it will emerge as a masterpiece in ten, twenty, thirty years. I guess what made me angry was his assertion that the backlash had no substance and it was due to "peer pressure," which is BS.
No, I understand your point clearly, it's just at a crossroads with mine. No matter what you have to say about a film, why someone likes or doesn't like a film, and how they choose to express that feeling, is completely their own prerogative. It doesn't affect the movie at all, and it's not an issue that will ever be resolved. Since the dawn of movies this kind of debate has happened, and it shows no sign of stopping.