My top 50 movies of the last 10 years
The Online Film Critics Society, in honor of its 10th anniversary, recently held a survey among its members to determine the best 100 movies of the last 10 years. We all worked to produce a list of 400 worthy films from 1996-2005, and then everyone chose their personal top 50. Now those top 50 lists have been used to compile the group’s official Top 100.
(The Top 100 is finished, but it hasn’t been announced yet. I don’t know why.)
Here is my top 50 list. I didn’t spend hours and hours on it, so I don’t know if every single film is exactly where it should be. For instance, is “Kung Fu Hustle” (#33) necessarily better than “The Royal Tenenbaums” (#34)? Or should they be switched? I don’t know. But in general, the order of the list reflects my true opinions.
I count seven animated films, one documentary, six foreign-language movies, three musicals, 10 films that played at Sundance, and three movies with “Lord of the Rings” in the title. I’m surprised there are that many cartoons, not surprised there are that many Sundance movies, surprised there aren’t more foreign films.
What films that aren’t included here would be on your top 50 for 1996-2005?
Eric’s Top 50 Films of the Past 10 Years
1. Fight Club
2. Toy Story 2
3. Waiting for Guffman
4. Memento
5. Requiem for a Dream
6. About a Boy
7. Moulin Rouge
8. Far from Heaven
9. A History of Violence
10. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
11. Spider-Man 2
12. Run Lola Run
13. Spirited Away
14. The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
15. Kill Bill, Volume 2
16. The Incredibles
17. Road to Perdition
18. 28 Days Later
19. About Schmidt
20. Adaptation
21. Billy Elliot
22. The Blair Witch Project
23. The Hunchback of Notre Dame
24. Life is Beautiful
25. L.I.E.
26. The Triplets of Belleville
27. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
28. Sin City
29. The Iron Giant
30. The Sixth Sense
31. South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut
32. O Brother, Where Art Thou?
33. Kung Fu Hustle
34. The Royal Tenenbaums
35. Being John Malkovich
36. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
37. Brokeback Mountain
38. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
39. Dark City
40. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
41. The Game
42. Kill Bill, Vol. 1
43. Shaun of the Dead
44. The Spanish Prisoner
45. Super Size Me
46. The Sweet Hereafter
47. Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter Jr.
48. Nobody Knows
49. The Saddest Music in the World
50. Hedwig and the Angry Inch
September 21st, 2006 at 5:15 am
I’m also surprised that there aren’t more foreign-language movies. But I’m not going to knock a list that puts Fight Club in the top spot.
I know the movie has a dedicated fanbase, but it’s something else when it’s singled out as great by someone who sees an awful lot of movies and views them critically.
Also, glad you remembered Dark City.
September 21st, 2006 at 7:00 am
I think you meant “A History of Violence”, not “The” history.
Also, I think you meant to put it way, way lower.
September 21st, 2006 at 7:22 am
Not a bad list, and I wholehearted concur with many of the choices (but can’t understand others- but that’s how these lists go). The Game is one that sticks out as a great choice, as does the Spanish Prisoner. I’d also take Batman Begins, Hero, Mystic River, The Bourne Supremacy, Equilibrium (for its awesome final fight scene), Waking Ned Devine, Open Range, Toy Story 2. It’s actually a lot harder to compile a list like this than you’d think.
September 21st, 2006 at 7:43 am
Any chance of making a 50 worst movies list. I’m interested to see how many Wayans Bros. movies make the list. Probably all of them. Also I really want that Amanda Bynes super fan to send in more emails.
September 21st, 2006 at 8:23 am
So you could only choose your top 50 from a pool of 400 “worthy” films?
So personal guilty pleasure favorites like “Kung Pow” (which Eric hated) would be ineligible to be included in the list?
September 21st, 2006 at 9:20 am
My personal list would definitely include “Central Station,” which lost the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film in 1999 to “Life is Beautiful” (which I hated).
September 21st, 2006 at 10:09 am
Oh, wow, Audrey! You are the first person I have ever met—well, “met” probably isn’t the right word, but you get the idea—outside of my family who doesn’t like “Life is Beautiful.” We thought we were the only ones. We should start a club! Or something.
September 21st, 2006 at 10:34 am
Let us not forget that O Brother, Where Art Thou was Entertainment Weekly’s Worst Movie of 2000. (Dancer in the Dark, I think, was their best movie of 2000). I’ve been puzzling over that for five+ years.
September 21st, 2006 at 11:02 am
Gumby: Yes, we chose from a list of 400. But that list was compiled by having everyone submit their top 10 movies from each of the 10 years in question — 10 from 1996, 1997, 1998, etc. I forget how many people’s lists a movie had to be on for it to make the 400 list, but it wasn’t very many. It was more than one, though, so yeah, if you had “Kung Pow” as one of your top movies of whatever year that was, and if you were the only one who did so (and you would be), it would not make the final cut and therefore be ineligible for your top 50 list.
WoodBoy: EW’s two critics each compile their own Best and Worst lists. It was Owen Gleiberman who declared “O Brother” the worst film of the year. He almost always has something on his Worst list that right-thinking people agree shouldn’t be there, something kneejerk and reactionary and intentionally controversial (and often something that he didn’t even give an F to when it initially came out). Like, even if you didn’t particularly care for “O Brother” … come on, the WORST film of the year? In a year that also had “Battlefield Earth” and “Blair Witch 2″? Please.
September 21st, 2006 at 11:04 am
Mostly, I’m just curious. But, I wonder where is Napoleon Dynamite? Did it not make the “400″ worthy films list? If so, that’s a shame. It’s probably one of the better comedies of recent years.
Glad to see The Hunchback of Notre Dame (an extremely underrated movie, IMO) but where is Finding Nemo? Surely it’s better than just about every animated feature up there.
September 21st, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Also glad to see Hunchback. Really glad to see Spirited Away there as well.
I saw Dark City a while ago, and was impressed by its mood and technical achievements, but thought the ending was extraordinarily silly. (I know, I know, I didn’t “get it.”)
Just one question, though… where’s Titanic?
September 21st, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Oh, I love lists of “best” movies. Naturally, I never completely agree with anyone, but it’s still fun to see which horrific movies people love and which guilty pleasures of mine don’t end up on the list.
Movies that wouldn’t have even made my top 100 list: Fight Club, Billy Elliot, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgendy
Movies that I thought were fantastic that weren’t on the list: The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. …and Stealth (just kidding)
September 21st, 2006 at 2:04 pm
“Napolean Dynamite” was another movie that was placed on one of the Entertainment Weekly’s critics “Worst Of” lists. I believe it was Schwarzbaum this time, but I could be wrong. I did a limited search and couldn’t find it. Anyway, sometimes I think that certain people just don’t have enough similar cultural experiences to really appreciate the film.
September 21st, 2006 at 2:12 pm
Like me. I know I don’t appreciate it like everyone else seems to. It was good and all, but whoa, people!
September 21st, 2006 at 2:52 pm
Amelie
The Green Mile
Punch-Drunk Love
Finding Nemo
Almost Famous
The Passion of the Christ
September 21st, 2006 at 5:35 pm
Eric, I’d like to know why South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut is on your list. I rarely disagree with your reviews, and I’ve noticed you’re somewhat of a fan (evidenced in your review of Pine Derby, and some other articles), but why? Really, why? I’m not trying to start a huge discussion or anything, but I’d put it somewhere between Garfield: The Movie and Friday the 13th Part III. I’d just like to hear your point of view.
September 21st, 2006 at 7:44 pm
South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut is a brilliant movie. It is very funny and one of the few movies that I can watch over and over again. Matt Stone and Trey Parker are really quite brilliant with their humor. It may be vulgar but it is hilarious as well. Team America was another great movie.
I would definitely put Harry Potter on that list and strip it of the 3 movies with “Lord of the Rings” in the title but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
September 21st, 2006 at 8:10 pm
Well, I haven’t seen more than a handful of these, but Toy Story 2, Memento and Guffman would all be in my Top 10 as well. Of the Top 10, I thought Moulin Rouge was good in some ways and also overwrought, and Fellowship was a big yawner for me (especially compared to the next two). I thought Anchorman, Road to Perdition and Spidey 2 were all overrated, but I did love Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine, and Life is Beautiful is in a three way tie for #1 for me with Excalibur and Shawshank.
When you say “The Game”, do you mean that Michael Douglas thing from way back when? I vaguely remember seeing it and being involved in it but somehow being let down by the ending for some reason. I thought his Falling Down was great, though.
Anyway, thanks for the list. I’ll have to check out some of the (many) ones I haven’t seen.
September 21st, 2006 at 8:24 pm
Ah, sorry. I didn’t even answer the question, as Excalibur and Shawshank were both prior to 1996. I would include Monsters Inc. and Finding Nemo. As great as all of the Pixar movies have been, those two and Toy Story 2 are just a notch above the others for me. I would take Batman Begins over Spidey any day, so that would go in. Minority Report is, I think, an incredible film. I like A Mighty Wind on par with Guffman, and Unbreakable on par with The Sixth Sense, so those should be there. And Star Trek: First Contact for being the best of all the ST films (which isn’t necessarily saying much, but it was great, regardless).
September 22nd, 2006 at 9:35 am
the big lebowski-yes
mighty wind-yes
best of show-yes
ron burgundy-dog doodoo
moulin rouge-eeeeeuuuuuw
September 22nd, 2006 at 11:56 am
I’m one of those people who thinks that “watchability” should be about 75% of a movie grade because I generally go to cinema for entertainment purposes. I want to watch the movie (Do not mistake me for someone who only wants to watch mindless fluff. I dislike most of the mindless fluff out there.), and I am not there to merely pick out the fine points of the direction, the cinematography, and other artistic merits. If the writing and acting are good, then I probably couldn’t care less about which angles are shot or if the entire movie is set in the middle of a sand dune. On the flip, a movie could be filmed in the glorious French countryside where I lived (thus having supreme interest to me) with spectacular aerials and with amazingly designed scenes and some awesome never-done-before style, but if the writing, story, or acting is bland, then I think it absolutely sucks*. That said, my list could never include “Adaptation”, “The Triplets of Belleville”, or “Hedwig and the Angry Inch”. Those tortured me for as long as I could stand to watch them. I didn’t understand the appeal of any of them. I also thought “Anchorman” was very funny the first time I saw it, and the couple of times I tried to watch it later were SO BORING. What is that?!
Now, a few movies that would belong in my top 50 that aren’t on Eric’s awesome list: “Amelie”, “Pleasantville”, and “Best in Show”.
*”absolutely sucks” is, of course, completely subjective. What enthralls me could bore you to tears and vice-versa.
September 22nd, 2006 at 5:34 pm
The LOTR films were Boring with the capital B. I don’t know anybody over the age of 15 who really liked them. The first one bored me to tears, and I didn’t bother with the other two. I also can’t understand the “Life Is Beautiful” grandstanding. It was a terrible movie, but more than that, it was a lie. (”Central Station” is a much better film.) The Spider Man movies have always escaped me, as have the charms of Will Ferrell. Aside from that, though, not a bad list.
I would have added “Goodbye Dragon Inn”, one of my favorite movies of all time, as well as “In the Mood For Love”. Though it was technically an HBO production, I think “Angels in America” is one of the best movies of the past decade and probably the best Mike Nichols film ever. I’d replace that Will Ferrell movie with “Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle”, my favorite movie from last year. I’d also list “Gods and Monsters” and “AI”, the last real Kubrick picure. That’s all I can think of at the moment.
September 22nd, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Hurray for Toy Story 2 being up near the top! I’d throw in Sleepy Hollow and Shall We Dance? as well (the Japanese one, which is brilliant, and not the Richard Gere remake, which is blech). I agree with Eric Russell on Finding Nemo. It gets better every time. I’d also put in the 2005 version of Pride and Prejudice because of it’s excellent acting, gorgeous cinematography, and excellent score.
September 22nd, 2006 at 7:59 pm
Richard, you said:
The LOTR films were Boring with the capital B. I don’t know anybody over the age of 15 who really liked them. The first one bored me to tears, and I didn’t bother with the other two.
While I certainly can’t fault you for having an opinion on the LOTR movies, I have to say that your generalities are completely unfounded. I happen to know several people over 15 who enjoyed the films. In fact, a large number of people did otherwise it wouldn’t have made as much money as it did. However, that is not a measure of quality, for sure. I simply state that your generality is slightly overwraught.
However, you state that the LOTR FILMS (plural) are boring–when you say that you didn’t even bother with the last two. How can you say that? I suppose I should expect this kind of flawed logic and vaunted self-importance from people who are simply trying to prove their own short-sided points, but if you really think that all the films are boring, don’t you think you should actually SEE the films before you make that kind of judgement?
September 22nd, 2006 at 9:36 pm
Did I say that? Yes, I did. Perhaps I should elaborate.
After having seen Fellowship of the Rings in the local theatre, at two and a half hours at least a half-hour too long, I rented The Two Towers when it came out on video. I tried to watch it twice (that’s two rentals) and couldn’t get beyond the first hour before I was dozing. When the third film won all those Oscars, I gave it a chance when it showed up on the Encore channel. I lasted about an hour into that one before I gave it up for a baseball game. When I came back to it after the ballgame, it still had about forty-five minutes to go. I counted at least two endings, but by then I wasn’t really paying much attention.
I’d read and loved the Tolkein books when I was young and so far as I’m concerned they can never be made into successful movies. Peter Jackson proved it. The books live in my imagination. The movies were confusing, over-produced, poorly acted and overloaded with headache-inducing special effects. I’m glad Mr. Jackson made his pots of money. Maybe next time he can do better than produce a King Kong whose fur bristles visibly onscreen.
My flawed logic and vaulted self-importance have been redeemed a bit, I hope. I also hope that you notice that I haven’t insulted you here.
September 23rd, 2006 at 9:54 am
Eric has some fantastic movies up there, although I would quibble with the relative placement of several of them. (Fight Club the best movie of the past ten years? Spider-Man 2 better than Kill Bill, vol 2??)
Movies that would have made my top 100 list that did not make Eric’s:
A Very Long Engagement (2004)
Princess Mononoke (1997)
Hero (2002) (for the music, cinematography and fight choreography)
Heights (2004)
Amélie (2001)
Amores Perros (2000)
Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005)
Big Fish (2003)
All About My Mother (1999)
Movies that made Eric’s top fifty that would not have made mine (does not include movies on his list that I haven’t seen):
Toy Story 2
Moulin Rouge
The Lord of the Rings I & II
Billy Elliot
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Life is Beautiful
September 23rd, 2006 at 4:46 pm
I’d have lumped the LotR movies into one number.
I’m amazed that As Good As It Gets didn’t make the list. Mildly surprised that Mystic River didn’t.
September 24th, 2006 at 7:15 am
Life is Beautiful is a terrible movie, and a lie? Huh? Sentimental, yes, but very funny and smart in many ways, incredibly sweet and well acted and directed. And a nice underlying theme that you’ve got to keep hope and humor alive in the worst of situations. A lie? You better not mean The Holocaust… but otherwise, yeah, it was a romantic fantasy based around an otherwise true setting. Most comedy is contrived, you know. It’s not often contrived nearly as well as that, though.
Ah yes, As Good as it Gets. Great movie!
September 24th, 2006 at 8:00 am
You should hear Doctor Ilona Klein at BYU go off on Life is Beautiful. Her grandmother (great-grandmother?) died at Auschwitz, so the Holocaust is kind of a tender subject for her. In her opinion, the light-hearted portrayal of the concentration camp in Life is Beautiful is insulting and misleading–in other words, yes, a lie. She can go on for hours; she really HATES that movie. She also hates Frankl’s “Man’s Search for Meaning” for pretty much the same reason. I have to admit, after taking her class and reading Primo Levi’s first-hand account of Auschwitz, “If This is a Man,” I tended to agree with her.
September 24th, 2006 at 7:30 pm
>Her grandmother (great-grandmother?) died at Auschwitz, so the Holocaust is kind of a tender subject for her
Understandable, but…
>the light-hearted portrayal of the concentration camp in Life is Beautiful is insulting and misleading–in other words, yes, a lie
Um, no, the concentration camp in Life is Beautiful depicts the cruelty, mass murder and terrible conditions that existed there. It also depicts a man doing his best to survive and stay sane in the way he best knows how to (with humor) and trying to keep hope and goodness alive in his son. The setting is not light-hearted, the character is. Big difference.
And as much of a contrived fantasy as the film is, and as much of a fictional character as Guido certainly is, I’d venture to say that among the millions in the camps, there were probably at least a few who approached their situation in much the same way, because that’s just how some people are. Millions died in the camps, but many did survive and were released and went on to live for many years thereafter. Some of them rightfully took hope, gratitude, love and faith out with them, just like the kid in the film. It’s a wonderful movie in many ways, unless you’re expecting it to be literal truth or veangeful in some way, which it certainly is not meant to be. But artistic truth and beauty is there in abundance.
September 24th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
>Um, no, the concentration camp in Life is Beautiful depicts the cruelty, mass murder and terrible conditions that existed there.
Understand first that I really don’t have any strong feelings for or against the movie. But I really don’t think you can say that Life Is Beautiful “depicts the cruelty, mass murder and terrible conditions” when most of those elements are either pushed to the background or are simply elided. The concentration camp was merely a background to Guido’s experience–a background that he hardly even seemed to notice at times, a luxury that was hardly available to anyone actually living in a death camp.
My point was, however, that it is possible for a person to believe that Life Is Beautiful was a “lie” without being a holocaust denier–while being quite the opposite, in fact.
September 24th, 2006 at 10:21 pm
Can anyone really have, as a criterion for judging the quality of a movie, whether it is a lie? I have a shiny one-dollar bill for anyone who can name a movie that was completely factual. Even movies that claim to be true stories take artistic liberties; I don’t think “Life is Beautiful” ever claimed to be even based on a true story, other than that the Holocaust happened.
It reminds me of people who think it’s silly that I like professional wrestling because “it’s fake.” I often have to remind them that Ross and Rachel didn’t get together in real life, Kiefer Sutherland can’t really kill an entire army with his bare hands, and that guy from “Party of Five” isn’t really a doctor stranded on an island after a plane crash. If “not fake” was what I was looking for in my entertainment, I would avoid TV and movies altogether. (And I would be bored most of the time.)
September 24th, 2006 at 11:25 pm
APMUSICMAN: “Napoleon Dynamite” was not on the 400 list. “Finding Nemo” was, but didn’t make my top 50. It was probably 51.
DAVID MANNING: “South Park” is on my list because it’s a brilliantly funny parody of: 1) musicals, both the Disney animated variety and the old-fashioned Broadway type, and 2) modern American society in general, including but not limited to people’s rush to blame the media for everything and the media’s overindulgence in shallow shock humor. The fact that “South Park” IS responsible for some things and that it DOES indulge in shallow shock humor gives the parody the added dimension of being self-referential, making it all the more clever.
RICHARD: Almost everyone I know liked the LOTR movies, and I don’t know anyone younger than about 20. The box office receipts suggest most of movie-going America liked them, in fact, including people both over and under the age of 15. I think your statement is an example of a common tendency in humans: We prefer to believe that everyone agrees with us. You didn’t like LOTR, so you convince yourself no one else did either, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.
PIZZOCALABRO: I have watched “Princess Mononoke” twice now and yet I continue to fail to love it. There are people who think this means there is something wrong with me. I WANT to love it, but it just isn’t happening for me.
JEFF: True enough, but you can see why people would expect a movie that’s based on a real event to be honest about it.
That said, to complain about “Life Is Beautiful’s” failure to properly address the horrors of the Holocaust is to miss the point of the movie. The movie isn’t ABOUT the Holocaust. It’s about a man’s love for and devotion to his family, sacrificing everything in an attempt to ensure their happiness even under the darkest of circumstances. The Holocaust is the setting Benigni chose, but it could have been any grim or difficult situation. I do understand why people become sensitive about Holocaust-related films, but I really think you have to watch “Life Is Beautiful” not literally but as something of a parable.
September 25th, 2006 at 10:59 am
I have to say that I was horrified by the movie “Life Is Beautiful,” and I really liked it. It portrayed the Holocaust to me in a way that I was able to recognize the inhumanity that went on without causing me to want to commit suicide after watching it. I actually got the same feeling from “Schindler’s List,” except that “Schindler’s List” caused me to feel of the inhumanity for about three hours consecutively. I sobbed and sobbed. Similarly, the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. gave me the same feeling. I liked the movie “Life Is Beautiful” for that reason. It got across the horror of the situation plus a touching storyline of sacrifice for another’s cause, and I didn’t need counseling afterward.
Also, I prefer “Princess Mononoke” over “Spirited Away.” In fact, I didn’t really like “Spirited Away.”
Wow, I love seeing everyone’s opinions.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:25 pm
Thanks for the commentary on my “South Park” question. I think the show can be occasionally hilarious, but that the movie was just awful. I didn’t laugh once. I prefer your humor style over Stone’s/Parker’s *because* it handles everything in a mature manner, and without the tongue of Mike Tyson. (Come to think of it, I prefer your style of humor to any other, including that of entire movies’.) The guys at South Park make some good points (this is my opinion), but the way they treat their victims/indulge in what they’re blasting/joke about Saddam Hussein having sex with the devil I often find to be simply too cruel/unnecessary/overdoing it, no matter how badly Saddam Hussein asked for it. Even when you’re (Eric) making fun of something/someone, there’s a certain mandatory level of respect you uphold, and I’ve always loved that. I guess I see your stuff not as sophomoric, but …I don’t know–really, really funny.
That’s all. I promise.
May 5th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
If you have the stomach for it, South Park is the most thought-provoking, hilarious show on television (in my mind). The movie is probably in my top 5 all-time, but I can understand why some people would shy away from South Park’s style of humor. If you can take it though, either you don’t understand it, or you aren’t watching.