Movies of 2012-Happy Birthday Bob!

10) Chronicle:

A fairly recent development in movies is the concept of found footage films. This development has unfortunately led to the existence of such (god forbid I call them) movies such as The Blair Witch Project, and the Paranormal Activity series. Then in early February came Chronicle, the story of three friends in high school who inexplicably develop telekinetic abilities, all of which is depicted through the main character’s camcorder as well as security footage from various locations. 

Was it groundbreaking? No. Was it a fresh take on the sci-fi/ superhero genre? Not nearly as much as it seems to think. Was the use of found footage more than just a little gimmicky? Absolutely. So why did this make my cut? Because the fact that someone made a found footage film that was actually watchable is something I was not prepared for. The acting wasn't great, but its characters are ordinary people who only realize their being filmed upon their introductions, so any weak acting performances are actually deliberate. In short, the film boasts a talented cast of actors who know how not to act. And in a "great power, great responsibility" story such as this, that only works to the films advantage.

9) Hunger Games:

This is another film that doesn't register as one of my all time favorites, or comes that close. Based on the first installment of a series of young adult novels of the same name, Hunger Games depicts an alternate dystopian future in which a totalitarian government rules over 12 colonies that had unsuccessfully attempted a rebellion some time before the events of the film. To instill a sense of fear into the colonies as well as allay any future possibility of rebellion, a tournament is held in which 2 children from each colony are randomly selected to compete in a televised battle to the death (the eponymous Hunger Games). When young Primrose Everdeen is chosen as a contestant, her older sister, Katniss, volunteers to compete in her place.

This is another film that doesn't register as one of my all time favorites, or comes that close. But I'm not part of its target audience. The movie actually pitches itself to the 12-16 demographic, which considering its rather dark premise is pretty risky. But it does exactly what anything based on young adult material should set out to do. It serves as what I like to call a "segue series", meaning that it helps to ease the transition between material made for children and material made for adults. Though it is slightly manipulative, it doesn't pander to its audience, and doesn't pull any punches in terms of content, which is more than can be said for a lot of series aimed at that demographic. I do think pathos wasn't evenly distributed between characters, but again, not part of the target audience. Now that the Harry Potter and Twilight series are over, residual fans of those series will likely look to another series, and if they should choose Hunger Games, then it's a step in the right direction.

8) Looper:

In the future, time travel is finally discovered, and immediately outlawed. But does that stop people from using it? Hell no. Looper depicts an alternate future in which the mafia uses time travel as a method of disposing of “undesirables”. Once sent through time, these undesirables are executed by agents recruited from the relative past (the movie's present, try to keep up!). Joseph Gordon-Levitt portrays one such agent, who is one day tasked with executing his future self, played by Bruce Willis. When he fails, both versions of the character must fight for their survival, as well as their now respective futures.

I really had to flip a coin on whether or not to include this one. For the first two acts, the film does everything right. The plot is interesting, the performances are top notch, and the chemistry between Levitt and Willis is great. Then comes the third act of the film, in which it gradually turns into a completely different, less interesting film. If not for that, this may well have made my all time favorites. But as it stands, the first two acts more than qualify it for eighth place.

7) The Avengers:

Set in the Marvel Film Universe, when the demigod Loki returns from exile to take over the world, The Strategic Homeland Intelligence, Enforcement, and Logistics Division (S.H.I.E.L.D.), assembles a team of some of the Marvel Universes greatest heroes and anti-heroes. Among this team are Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, The Hulk, Nick Fury, Black Widow, and Hawkeye.

Four years ago at the conclusion of Iron Man, the possibility of The Avengers was hinted at, but being unable to choose between optimism and pessimism, I dismissed it as a rumor. Yet the subsequent marvel movies continued to hint at it, and eventually, unlike many other instances, the hype paid off. Nearly everything about the film comes together. It utilizes the best elements of its nearly 50-year-old source material and almost effortlessly brings out the best in its colorful cast of characters. It doesn’t do for the comic book movie genre what The Dark Knight did, but it didn’t try and it didn’t have to. In essence, this is everything that a Michael Bay movie should be:  a fast-paced escapist thrill ride with an impressive usage of CGI without the mediocrity over which you could start a drinking game. Hopefully this film is an indicator of what we can expect from Joss Whedon in the near future.

6) Skyfall:

When James Bond is left for dead following a failed attempt to stop a mercenary from releasing vital information on undercover operatives placed in terrorist organizations by NATO states, he uses it as an excuse to retire. But when MI6 comes under attack from a former operative, he comes out of retirement to eliminate the threat.

It says a lot when the 23^rd installment of a franchise manages to not only live up to its predecessors, but quite frankly manages to surpass many of them. Daniel Craig has, in my opinion, firmly established himself as the second best James Bond (cause no one beats Connery. They just don’t). It reintroduces several classic elements from Bonds past that are sure to strike a nostalgic chord or two, as well as new elements that serve as welcome additions to the canon of the franchise. With an intelligent, if somewhat confusing plot, and well directed action sequences, Skyfall does great justice to its franchise, and lays down the foundation for many more installments to come.

5) Les Misérables:

Based on the classic novel and musical by Victor Hugo, Les Misérables takes place at various points during the French revolution, and follows Jean Valjean, a recently paroled prisoner who violates his parole and forges a new identity for himself to find work. Eventually he is recognized by his former guard turned police officer, Javert, and is forced into hiding, setting in motion a series of events far beyond themselves.

As I’ve yet to read the book or see the musical, I can only judge this movie as a stand-alone effort, as opposed to a faithful or even accurate adaptation. As it stands, it definitely works. The production values are incredible, and the performances were top notch. Setting aside a few forgivable problems with the pacing, my primary issue with this film is not necessarily that it’s a musical, but that the cast constantly sings throughout the entire movie. This is a story that conveys brutality meant to evoke strong reactions from an audience, and I feel that plain spoken dialogue during its more intense scenes would’ve been much more appropriate and effective. This wouldn’t be an issue with a stage production, but with film there’s more of an emotional disconnect with an audience, and I just feel that the characters should be allowed to actually feel what they’re singing about without having to narrate how they feel in song throughout the whole film. I’ve been called anal for citing this as a criticism, and perhaps I am a bit, but that doesn’t mean I have any contempt for the film. On the contrary, I have a great deal of respect for it. Anyone can see that a great deal of effort went into making it as good as it was, and the results more than paid off.

4) Moonrise Kingdom:

Set in 1965 on an island in New England, Moonrise Kingdom is the story of Sam Shakusky, a recently orphaned, 12-year-old “khaki scout,” and Suzie Bishop, the oldest of four children brought up in a troubled marriage. After maintaining a pen pal relationship, they finally agree to run away from their respective homes to meet in secret. Not too far behind them are the island’s local police captain, Suzie’s parents, and Sam’s scoutmaster and troop.

I wouldn’t have know of this movie had a friend of mine not casually suggested it. I tried to look up the plot online beforehand, but turned up no results. Looking back, I count that as a blessing, because honestly, no one should know what this movie is about before seeing it. It can’t be accurately summarized in a few minutes and it can’t really be sold to a target demographic. I can usually form an opinion about a movie within a short period of having seen it, but after having first seen Moonrise Kingdom, I had to think long and hard before I had a fully articulate opinion. And it dawned on me that for the first time in a long time, I’d seen something that was actually original. I mean it. I can only think to compare it to Wes Anderson’s other works, and that’s a very loose association. I can’t say that this film appeals to everyone’s tastes, and I think it’s because it’s confusing. Not that it’s hard to follow, but it’s capable of evoking nearly every emotion from an audience. It’s funny, it’s dark, it’s touching, it’s shocking, yet somehow it never becomes uneven. How? Because that’s life. It’s not always idyllic, and it’s not always dystopian. It just is what it is, and I can’t think of any other film to have pulled that off with such finesse.

3) Lincoln:

I don’t really feel it necessary to go into much detail about the plot of this film since pretty much everyone knows the context to some degree. Lincoln follows the eponymous president during the last four months of his life as he tries to persuade Congress to pass the 13^th amendment in order to outlaw slavery. I’m just going to address the elephant in the room here, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. That was an actual thing that happened and it was awful. Which makes it all the more fortunate that this film came out a few months later to undo every bit of damage done by Vampire Hunter. It marks a surprising directorial return to form for Steven Spielberg, it utilizes the talents of a wide variety of character actors that you don’t always see on the big screen, and it gives yet another in a long line of superb performances from Daniel Day-Lewis. But when it comes right down to it, I think its greatest strength is also its greatest flaw. It’s essentially 150 minutes watching a bill get passed that manages to be exciting. But that’s where I think it also suffers a bit. I don’t think I’m giving anything away when I say that the bill gets passed and slavery is abolished. This might just be me being anal again, but when most of the suspense generated by the film depends on whether or not the bill will be passed, the effect is somewhat diminished. I’m well aware that this movie isn’t trying to have a surprise ending, and it certainly shouldn’t deter anyone from seeing it by any means. Its many strengths more than make up for this one flaw that most likely only bothers me personally, and it’s not enough to keep me from seeing it again.

2) Argo:

Based on the 2007 account of the “Canadian Caper,” Argo follows Tony Mendez, a CIA operative charged with rescuing six U.S. diplomats from Tehran, Iran, during the Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979. To do so, he joins the diplomats and has them pose as a film crew scouting a location for the fake film, Argo.

I was torn between Argo and Lincoln for the #2 spot, but I decided to go with Argo. As much as I hate to admit it, Ben Affleck is a great director, and it really shows in Argo. Part biopic, part caper, Argo is a subtle, intelligent, funny, and suspenseful film with flaws that are very few and very far between. I only wish I had more to say about it.

1) Life of Pi:

Based on the 2001 novel of the same name by Yann Martel, Life of Pi follows a 16-year-old Indian boy named Piscine Molitor "Pi" Patel who becomes stranded in the middle of the ocean following a shipwreck, of which he was the only survivor. That is until he discovers that an adult Bengal tiger that was also on the ship managed to survive. With the tiger, “Richard Parker,” as his only companion, Pi not only has to defend himself, but also has to form an uneasy alliance so as to survive and maintain his sanity during his isolation.

I can’t really think of anyone this film wouldn’t appeal to. Its acting is superb, its visuals, both live-action and CG, are spectacular, and its plot never ceases to intrigue. What caught me off guard was how it raised so many interesting questions about faith, religion, and whether or not humans and animals are capable of overcoming their respective natures, yet it never once settled for any easy answers. Rather, it allowed for the audience to come to their own conclusions. While it presents a familiar premise, it effortlessly avoids cliché at every turn. With more than enough action to satisfy younger audiences and enough heart and intelligence to fascinate adults, Life of Pi easily deserves its place as my favorite film of 2012.