The 2000s: 2007
I’m gonna knock 2007 and 2008 out this week, and I will do 2009 in music before the Grammy’s and 2009 in film before the Oscars in March. Then I have some plans I wanna talk about later this week.
2007: Favorite Moments in Film
2007 offered one of the better years of this decade in film. It provided some of the most compelling drama in films like The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford and from 3 films (Zodiac, 3:10 To Yuma, and The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) that everyone I know really liked but I have been to damn lazy to see. It also brought us what may be Judd Apatow’s best comedy in Knocked Up and 2/3 of a film in Superbad that if it had a better middle 1/3 would definitely be on this list.
It also saw some huge franchises deliver films that failed to live up to their predecessor’s, as the 3rd films in the Spider-Man, Shrek, and Pirates of the Caribbean series all tanked critically (Though they still did huge, if not AS HUGE, business.)
On to the top 10.
- #10. Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
- #09. Enchanted
- #08. 300
- #07. No Country For Old Men
- #06. The Bourne Ultimatium
- #05. Ratatouille
- #04. Knocked Up
- #03. Juno
- #02. The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford
A pretty good year, all-in-all, with the requisite Pixar film added in as they are every time. None of these films are gonna be looked back 50 years from now as being some of the best films of all-time; my #1 on the other hand may end up in those discussions one day.
#01: There Will Be Blood
It’s funny. There are some people I know who are in total agreement with me of the brilliance of this film, and yet there are others who disdain it completely. There is no debating that There Will Be Blood is one of the best definitions of a “challenging” film. Its demeanor, its mood, its characters are completely contrast to what we see in the vast, vast majority of film (though strangely enough, I would say 2007’s No Country For Old Men would definitely fall into that category too.)
For me, I think it’s about whether or not you buy into Daniel Day Lewis’ performance as the cold-blooded oil tycoon Daniel Plainview. If you think he is overacting and minutes of brooding silence put you off, then you will hate this film. I however find that the entire film is told within the silent moments of the film as we see Plainview’s mind battle his heart and he slowly decomposes into sheer apathy for everything but hallow success. In turn, I believe Day Lewis’ portrayal of Plainview is one of the most outstanding ever captured on film.
That is to take nothing away of the gorgeous photography of Robert Elswit, the haunting score by Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood, or the genius of director Paul Thomas Anderson.
Anderson has been in the game for over 17 years, but he, like his star, is very picky about his projects and completely delves into the worlds he creates. I wish I had more classic film education so that this comparison held some weight, but I feel Anderson compares very well to the great(est) Stanley Kubrick. Kubrick once said, “A film is, or should be, more like music than like fiction. It should be a progression of moods and feelings.” There Will Be Blood flows from moods of isolation and apathy to deep seated feelings of anger and anxiety and we watch as Plainview vests (as much as he is able to) his interests into his “son” and “brother”, only to see them lead to the loss of any remaining connections he had with the world around hilm.
It’s a near perfect film, that I think Kubrick would be proud of.
