He's making a list. . .

Filmbrain apologizes for the paucity of posts lately -- he's been on a quest to catch up with the remaining films from 2004, esepcially those that might have had a shot at landing on his Top Ten list of the year. In the past few days, he saw Kinsey (harmless, but flat), The Life Aquatic (Anderson should go back to making smaller movies -- he does them so well), The Aviator (a really good film, just not a really good Scorsese film), The Woodsman (disappointing), Beyond the Sea (yikes!), Closer (wow!), and a bunch of films on DVD that he missed theatrically, including the film that's on almost everybody's list -- Before Sunset. The rest of the time, he has been reading everybody else's Top Ten list, and finding it harder and harder to comprehend how people can rank Million Dollar Baby as the best film of the year. Filmbrain is at the point of desperation -- seriously. Would anybody be willing to take the time to explain to him how this film is anything more than a cliché ridden Lifetime movie-of-the-week with cringe-inducing dialog? To point out what in the film is even remotely original, new, fresh, etc? Jonathan Rosenbaum joins the list of those that call it a masterpiece. A.O. Scott and Mahnola Dargis both have it as their number one of the year. (Dargis goes so far as to claim it contains the spirit of John Coltrane's A Love Supreme. What?!?) Why can't Filmbrain find even a hint of masterpiece in it? Would the accolades be tossed around if Clint was not involved? Please feel free to comment below. . .Filmbrain needs to discuss this with someone.

Comments

[Mikko]

All I can say is that I already felt Mystic River was getting far too much attention and praise. And I'm thinking I'll skip this new one altogether.

[phyrephox]

I thought that The Life Aquatic, in many ways, was a "smaller" Anderson movie, at least compared to his previous film.

[Filmbrain]

Rushmore worked so well because it was a charming story of three interesting characters. Here we have about a dozen, and the result comes off like a series of scenes, rather than a complete film. Some good moments, no question, but they don't amount to much.

[blooperreel]

i haven't seen the eastwood movie yet, but it's amazing to see such polarization. the only other films which seemed to divide serious critics in this way are dogville and huckabees. both wrestle with serious issues, but it seems the disagreements about million dollar baby are more aesthetic.

by the way, since it was the filmbrain blog that inspired me to start my own (typepad no less) i thought i'd send along a link to my end of year list...

http://democracysblooperreel.typepad.com/democracys_blooper_reel/2004/12/a_year_in_the_d.html

keep on keeping on

[Aaron H.]

You won't find no Million Dollar Babies or Aviators on my Top Ten list, but it'll take a face-to-face conversation over drinks for me to defend putting Life Aquatic up on the board.

[la depressionada]

I have been considering the Eastwood mystique for a number of years. His directorial efforts have represented an almost continuous descent over the years, moreover (in my uncineducated opinion) his greatest work is as an actor.

My conclusion is that because of Eastwood's silent stranger presentation he represents a kind of American auteurism that (especially more established/older/mainstream) critics have a little crush on. He has like a sexy, cinematic gravitas that critics covet.

I like his work (some of it alot), but it's often over-rated.

[George]

If it's any consolation, Andrew, I come out just about where you do on MDB. Brief post on it today, along with end-of-year bests and a look at THE MERCHANT OF VENICE.

[Greg Samsa]

Greg's Top 10

1. los angeles plays itself
2. the aviator
3. old boy
4. notre musique
5. tropical malady
6. last life in the universe
7. 2046
8. dogville
9. the brown bunny
10.the time of the wolf

honorable mentions: woman is the future of man, zatoichi: the blind swordsman, control room, the five obstructions, eternal sunshine of the spotless mind, the life aquatic, kill bill vol. 2, the dreamers, z channel, undertow, i heart huckabees, Henri Langlois: Phantom of the Cinematheque, sideways, closer, gozu.

[Sean]

I doubt I'll be seeing Million Dollar Baby until it comes out on DVD. But I thought you might be interested in seeing another negative review by James Rocchi. The man who writes movie reviews for Netflix. He has the movie positioned 2nd worst movie of the year--worse than Van Helsing! I don't believe you need an account to check out his blog and the review:

http://rocchireport.netflix.com/netflix_weblog/2005/01/a_few_notes_on_.html

[Greg Samsa]

Ah, so I see I am not the only one who thought Los Angeles Plays Itself was the film of the year!

http://www.nypress.com/18/1/film/SaulAusterlitz.cfm

[Luke]

Poor Filmbrain. No one will intelligently discuss Million Dollar Baby. And neither can I, because I don't really watch many new releases: still catching up on the classics! Speaking of which, why the *@^! do you think Netflix doesn't carry Murnau's Sunrise?

BTW, thanks for being the only Top 10 lister I've seen to place Dogville in its proper year.

[Filmbrain]

I've noticed lately that Netflix is lacking on other older films as well. Perhaps their price rollback forced them to stop carrying less popular titles?

[Filmbrain]

Oh...and, great list Greg. Angry I missed Los Angeles Plays Itself.

[Freddie Kipple]

Excuse me for my tardiness, friend, but MDB has only just reached the UK. After some deliberation, I decided to see it. I can report that many in the audience were sniffing, whilst I shook my head in disbelief at what is was watching.

I might say that Million Dollar Baby is the worst film I've seen in years, but that simply wouldn't do it justice. Cliched, emotionally manipulative and staggeringly crude, this is the work of Hollywood's favourite hack.

I firmly believed that it would have been knocked out in the first round by British film critics, but, bizzarely, they too have succumbed to its tv movie sentimentality.

It's a deeply reactionary film where an intellectually challenged character is used first as a figure of fun, then as a cipher for Morgan Freeman's nobility and sense of fair play (Familiar? We're just getting started).

Listing all the cliches of the boxing film Million Dollar Baby employs would take almost as long as the film itself, suffice to say that Eastwood signposts our arrival in Britain with a stock shot of Big Ben and liberally scatters Union Jacks around the 'River Thames Boxing Association' run venue. Jellied eels with yer cup of tea, sir?

Of course, Hillary Swank, Eastwood and Freeman can act. Although none do much more than reprise previous roles. Eastwood and Freeman spar in a contest presumably sponsored by the Gravel Voiced Boxing Association. Swank, leafs through her Boys Don't Cry Androgynous Survivor notes, adding muscle tone to check off the Academy's Physical Transformation box.

Once Swank's family arrive, the film really reveals its reactionary core: Fat, tatooed, welfare cheating scumbags, Central Casting would have sent them home for being a little on the obvious side. But with Clint, this is keeping it real.

Finally a note on the cinematography. Eastwood, never much of a technician, keeps it simple: underlit, green-hued, gritty. Or to put it another way, complimentary to the film in everyway - hackneyed.

Truth is, and I hope you can imagine Morgan Freeman delivering this in voice over, Clint never was much of a film maker. But, following Unforgiven (or rather David People's brilliant script), he's gained the gravitas and critical respect completely at odds with his abilities. If Swank's Maggie had known that of her trainer, she'd have stuck to serving the lemon meringue pie.

[W Vogel]

I share your horrified feelings about the critical groundswell for Million Dollar Baby--I'm so glad to hear you say it that I'll post a "hear, hear" in this long-dead thread.

The top-ten and awards love the movie has recently received is especially depressing; I can forgive people for not disliking the movie, but to publish it at #1, hoping to inform the masses of what a precious nugget they missed, is something else again.

I read this as an indication of how rarely anyone, even critics, has a strong sense of what is actually elegant and smart in movies. Our critical taste may be too catholic. I think the appreciation of this movie is a symptom of the self-conscious straddling of genres, especially between high and low, we're all infected with: Starsky and Hutch parody which trips into appreciation, Far from Heaven's refined melodrama, arch appreciation of Three's Company or screwball or westerns or comics. So now sophisticated works of art and cliched hack jobs have the same superficial characteristics. It's a subtle problem. In the case of Million Dollar Baby, its script clangs on your ear like a TV movie ... or maybe like a modern-day genre masterpiece! Is it dark and beautiful, or just badly-lit and, well, bad? In this situation, you have to know it when you see it. And I'm so disappointed in how everyone's seen it.

The other depressing possibility is that something's gone badly awry with my own taste.