Best Movies 2015

2015gold1

I see a lot of movies because of my job. Around 150-200 a year. I am not kidding. So while my tastes and yours may differ in terms of what’s good, I promise you that I am a rock-solid authority on what’s bad. I have seen the worst movies of the year. Every. Single. One. Of. Them. I have seen things that I can never unsee. I am intimately acquainted with the garbage that Hollywood and indiewood produce on a weekly basis. That comedy that looks like the worst thing ever committed to film starring a beloved movie star? Seen it. That fantasy occult movie starring some marble-mouthed action star? Sat through it. Twice. That gratuitous, exploitative horror movie made for five cents in someone’s backyard? Watched half of it, puked, had to go back and watched the rest. (Spoiler alert: I am not a fan of horror and therefore haven’t seen It Follows.)

So when I see a movie I enjoy, it shines like a diamond. Sometimes I weep with relief. It’s like Fagin brought me a cookie after months of eating gruel. That’s why I love to celebrate the best movies of the year. Also why I couldn’t limit myself to just ten, but awarded a bunch of honorable mentions as well. Because for the first time in a long time, this list could have been 20 films long. Filmmakers got their act together this year, and we are the richer for it.

Without further ado, here’s my list of the 10 best films of the year, in no particular order, with honorable mentions because I just can’t make the tough choices, damn it!

Ex Machina–One of the best science-fiction films to come out in a good long while, a creepy, prescient tale about a remarkable woman and the men who try to control her. Also highlights one of my favorite themes of the year: great roles for women.

Spotlight–You think you know the story of how the Catholic church covered up rampant pedophilia for so long, you think you understand the scope of the problem and the human element, but you don’t. This is more than a film about great journalism. It’s a film about how the system doesn’t always fail the victims.

Steve Jobs–This could have been an epic disaster. The director and screenwriter seemed mismatched. Fassbender seemed miscast. Instead, it’s a visual and verbal symphony, and every single actor captivates you. But none more than Fassy, in the first of two Oscar-worthy performances he gave this year.

Macbeth–This is the second. But more, it’s a streamlined, visceral, and mesmerizing interpretation of the Scottish play. It strips the text away, but in the service of really making the story into a film, with visuals and reaction shots conveying more than even Shakespeare’s prose could. And Justin Kurzel is a major new talent.

Mad Max: Fury Road–A batshit crazy feminist action film. The epic visuals. The death-defying practical stunts. Furiosa. All from the mind of an unsung master.

Inside Out–Still sobbing.

Diary of a Teenage Girl–A beautiful, honest, and enrapturing coming of age film about the real travails (and dreams and ambitions and fumbles and fights and love affairs) of a teenage girl. Must-see.

Sicario–Another portrait of a flawed female character thrust into circumstances not only beyond her control, but a situation that governments and law enforcement agencies are struggling to come to grips with. It’s strength, like hers, is in its stillness. And props to my fellow Quebecois Denis Villeneuve for his masterful direction.

Crimson Peak–A love letter to the Victorian Gothic. Two strong vital female leads in Mia Wasikowska and Jessica Chastain, and Tom Hiddleston at his creepiest and most romantic. What’s not to love?

Star Wars: The Force Awakens–Watching this was like being a kid again. There are movies not on this list that might be technically better, but nothing that comes close to rivalling the experience of watching this and loving it. And loving the new characters as much as the old. And seeing Han Solo be Han Solo again.

Honorable Mentions:

Excellent movies about difficult but riveting subjects: Room, ’71, Beasts of No Nation

Best comedy that didn’t quite make the list: Trainwreck

Mediocre movie I loved: Victor Frankenstein

Has everything working for it but just fell short of perfection: Carol

I liked this a lot more than everyone else: Avengers: Age of Ultron

More entertaining than any movie about real estate and economics has any right to be: The Big Short

Because seeing movies on film, in the cinema, with a crowd is still the most fun thing ever: The Hateful Eight

Further proof that Andrew Haigh is one of the most insightful and observant filmmakers working today: 45 Years

Further proof that Ridley Scott has still got it, even if he often hides it: The Martian

Furthermore (i.e. not among the best of the year):

Film critics are falling all over each other for that I loathed with every fiber of my being: Anomalisa (seriously, do not waste your money)

Yes, I am a woman and I sat through this macho BS twice: The Revenant (cinematography is beautiful, though)

Films I haven’t seen yet: The Danish Girl, Sisters, Creed

Hit me up in the comments with your picks and pans!

 

 

 

“Oh, just make out already!” Why genre cinema needs to go there, and soon, in the #Stucky era

Stucky

Four score and many moons ago, I wrote my graduate dissertation on, I kid you not, “Homosociality and the male anti-hero in A Clockwork Orange and Romper Stomper”. Inspired by the theories of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, I argued that in both of those films, the male leads were repressing their homosexual desires and/or more  stereotypically feminine aspects by exaggerating their macho behavior. That their hyper-masculinity was as much a performance as personality trait, there to mask desires and behavior that weren’t socially acceptable at the time. Both of those films are quite avant-garde, making the homosocial aspects of their lead characters’ relationships with their friend(s) explicit, but falling short of making this subtext text. Give the eras in which both films were made and the filmmakers involved, this is hardly a surprise.

But, as my new Prime Minister recently said, “It’s 2015,” and at least some of the recent/upcoming bromances need to become genuine onscreen romances.

VF

This fact was underlined by two recent pop culture events: the releases of Victor Frankenstein and the Captain America: Civil War trailer. In the former, a gonzo steampunk reinvention of the Frankenstein story, Daniel Radcliffe plays a brilliant but innocent young Igor as a Dickensian waif with mad surgical skillz. He is rescued from near-enslavement by dashing James McAvoy in Byronic mad scientist mode. The most compelling thing about the film is the chemistry between the two, as Victor seduces–though not literally–young Igor into helping him with his experiments, then turns on him when Igor grows a conscience. The best scenes in the film are where they banter, flirt, fight, share intimate details about their lives, nerd out over science. It’s a romance in everything but name.

There is, of course, the obligatory love interest (for Igor–Victor is far too self-absorbed to notice anyone not of use to him). Since she’s the typical girlfriend character, she’s boring and pointless, there to get injured and be saved, criticize Igor when he makes poor life decisions and support him when he finally decides to do the right thing. But how much more interesting would she have been if she was not there merely to support the lead, but was a participant in their activities as a platonic friend and character of equal merit. And the dramatic stakes of the film would have increased tenfold if Igor was scared he was losing not just a friend and employer in Victor, but his lover to ambition and madness.

Kosofsky Sedgwick derived her theory of the homosocial in part from 19th century novels, where the two male rivals for a woman’s affections would be the most well-defined characters, to the point where the beloved they were fighting over became superfluous. Given how women are still marginalized in modern cinema, especially in genre cinema, couldn’t we redefine both male and female roles by freeing women from the ‘girlfriend’ part and giving them more agency, and deepening the male relationships by having them actually be in one?

stucky61.gif

A significant portion of the audience is already clamoring for it. After the Captain America: Civil War trailer hit, highlighting Cap’s efforts to save his old friend Bucky from both friends and foes who want his head on a pike, the online response basically amount to: “Please, please, please, can they make out?” As beautifully illustrated in this sketch by @hunktears:

CapCWsketch.png

And amazing articles like this:  http://comicsalliance.com/super-stucky-steve-bucky-civil-war-trailer/ In it, Andrew Wheeler argues that:

“Yet if Bucky Barnes were a woman, this would be a love story, played out with all the same narrative beats. If Peggy were the brainwashed assassin kept frozen through the decades, this movie would definitely end in a kiss. Everything about the love, pain, and intimacy of the Steve/Bucky relationship on the big screen is typical of a romance, and that’s something fans are right to respond to — something the filmmakers may even be playing into, though surely not with any formal sign-off from Disney.

The world is increasingly more free, fair and tolerant for people in same-sex relationships, especially in countries like the US. Yet imagine this; if we lived in a world that had no hang-ups about same-sex relationships, no hate, no prejudice towards the idea of two men or two women together; do you doubt for a second that this movie would actually be a romance?

If everything else about this movie were the same, but we were different, wouldn’t it make sense for Steve and Bucky to kiss?”

It does make sense, and we are ready for it. (And, for my money, the filmmakers are deliberately playing on this in the trailer.) Who is Captain America’s romantic foil if not Bucky? They are the only two people in existence who have lived yin-yang versions of the same experience, who have fought each other and have died for each other, have been friends, comrades, enemies, and saviors, have a deeper connection than any two other characters in the MCU… so explain to me why they can’t be lovers. There isn’t even a token love interest standing in their way. Cap’s entire argument in this trailer seems to be, “Bucky is my friend, so don’t you dare lay a finger on him.” [Note: the details of the disagreement between Cap and Iron Man are undoubtedly more complex than this in the actual film, but this trailer is keeping those secrety secrets hidden, and for good reason.] It’s very Captain American to go to impossible lengths for friendship. But think of how much more powerful it would be if he went to war with his friends for love.

Film after film, it’s there in the subtext. It’s time to take a risk and turn these homosocial relationships into homosexual relationships. Why can’t Bucky and Steve be lovers? Why isn’t the new twist on Frankenstein that Victor and Igor have a tryst that turns tricksy? Why can’t Batman have given Robin a home because they have similar backstories *and* he has a thing for twinks? Why can’t Trish Walker be Jessica Jones’ ex-girlfriend, creating a love triangle between the two of them and Luke Cage? (Hands up who wants to see that threesome do a love scene!) Why can’t Jessica Chastain try to seduce Mia Wasikowska away from Tom Hiddleston, or want them both, in Crimson Peak? Why can’t The Vision be a trans or intersex character in Avengers: Age of Ultron–in fact, why does The Vision have a gender at all?

It all comes down to the same question, the one more and more people are demanding of their genre cinema: why aren’t there more queer characters, queer stories, queer superheroes and aliens and vampires and witches and shape-shifters and zombies and Gothic heroes/heroines?

Why isn’t there more queer representation in genre cinema?

Because, filmmakers, you subtext is showing.

 

[Note: Artist’s name for the top image of Steve and Bucky in bed is in the bottom of the frame. This is not my drawing, and I take no credit for it. If you know who the artist is, please contact me.]