Haha, professional movie blogger.

As I already tweeted and instagram’d about because everyone needs to know what everyone else is doing immediately, I saw Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master at the Ziegfeld Theatre in New York City last night. I bought the $10 ticket over a week in advance, not realizing it would be some legit premiere — although I should have guessed considering how awesome a theater it is. Yeah, there were some movie stars and important people but the coolest part was the free unlimited water and popcorn. I made sure to take advantage of that. My dinner was three small popcorns, and it was glorious. Fuck your paleo diet.

All right, enough about the extraneous garbage: I was there to see a film (in 70mm!) from one of the best filmmakers out there, one whose deliberateness in releasing new films makes the anticipation for each one that much greater. Unfortunately, right before the film started, Harvey Weinstein had to bring up politics because it was 9/11, but it was quickly forgotten once the film started.

The Master is not actually about Philip Seymour Hoffman’s “Master” nor is it about Scientology, despite having some similarities; it’s about Joaquin Phoenix’s broken Freddie Quell, a character in which Phoenix makes himself almost unrecognizable. I haven’t seen I’m Still Here, but I’m guessing that was something of a warm-up for the insane transformation he’s made here. Freddie constantly hunches over, makes unsettling contortions of his mouth and eyes, and slurs his words unintelligibly at times. He’s a violent, unpredictable drunk who cannot assimilate into society after his service in World War II. By total chance he literally stumbles across Lancaster “Master” Dodd (I could see this being a Chris Berman nickname), and a bond forms between the two almost immediately.

I know I said that the film is about Freddie, but perhaps it’s more about the relationship between Master and Freddie. And the performances from Hoffman and Phoenix are pretty much all someone could ask for. It’s an amazingly straight-forward film, especially for Anderson, but these two actors put on some showcases that are enthralling to watch. There’s a devastating scene featuring what Master calls “processing” (this seems like a nod to the Scientology influence) and a jail cell scene where both Master and Freddie absolutely explode. But instead of a climatic scene being the conclusion of the film like There Will Be Blood, The Master chronicles the slow disintegration of their relationship, a process that seems to hurt Master more than Freddie in the end.

If you’ve seen any other PTA films, you know he makes pretty moving pictures. The Master continues this tradition, and being shot totally in 65mm* helps. I cannot recommend enough going out and watching this in a theater equipped for it, but like IMAX, not many people have access to the real thing. Yet while the film is beautiful, I’d say PTA is less showy here than in his other work I’m familiar with (I haven’t seen Hard Eight). Boogie Nights had him aping Goodfellas for that opening tracking shot, Magnolia had raining frogs, Punch-Drunk Love had that scene-transition flair, and There Will Be Blood had the long wordless beginning and the oil rig explosion set piece. TWBB in particular comes across as a showcase for Daniel Day-Lewis, topped off by that final “I’m finished” line. The Master in comparison comes across as a more restrained affair, keeping its hold over the audience for its running time, throwing in a few pieces of comic relief, but leaving many audience members a little empty.

*I know I said I saw it in 70mm earlier, but that’s all I keep hearing, but then I read it was filmed in 65mm. Apparently the difference is the section used for the soundtrack? I really don’t know for sure.

The Master has to be the least entertaining PTA film I’ve seen. It’s not fun seeing Freddie Quell self-destruct, or Master trying to defend his outrageous claims about memory and past lives. There aren’t many surprises or absurdly amusing scenes. Despite the various locations in the film, it’s not detailing the fall of an entire industry, the intertwined lives of a dozen people, or the rise and moral fall of an oil magnate. This is an intimate film that perhaps counter-intuitively coldly keeps its distance. Amy Adams’ character (Mary Sue Dodd) might be the embodiment of that coldness, as she comes across as the true Master in some scenes. It’s a dynamic that shows that she’s helping Lancaster remain Master, stopping him from falling prey to the wildness of Freddie. It’s Freddie’s freespiritedness, undoubtedly fueled by his psychological issues and alcoholism, that draws Master to him. It’s a love story that’s not meant for a happy ending though, unlike the romance in Punch-Drunk Love.

Watching Punch-Drunk Love for the first time right before going to see The Master might have colored my view of the latter, but I enjoyed watching the former so much more. The Master is the work of a more mature, more confident filmmaker, and I’m sure Anderson made the film he wanted to make; it’s just that The Master is not the most fun 160 minutes you could spend in a theater. It plods along at times when it comes to Freddie’s therapy or processing or whatever Master refers to it as. And ultimately, Freddie doesn’t experience much growth, which kinda reminds me of another film that left me cold, Shame. I feel like I shouldn’t even bring that film up, as I think it’s hilariously self-aware about its artistic aspirations. But it came to mind, so I thought I’d throw it in here because I’m not quite sure how critics manage to write long film reviews.

Maybe I need another viewing — this time closer to the screen — to fully appreciate what Anderson has done here. There’s not much to nitpick when I try to critique the film, only the nagging feeling of being somewhat unsatisfied. It could be that I’m jealous of Freddie’s one-track sexual mind, where he’s able to suppress all his dark memories until someone forces them to come out. It could be that we’re all stuck somewhere between Freddie’s compete carelessness and recklessness and Master’s desire to achieve human perfection, despite his own all-too-human flaws. I know that I’ve been lost in my quest to balance the two for my entire adult life.

You were going to see The Master no matter what I said. Go see it.

I recently learned of the existence of a human being who hadn’t seen Die Hard until recently when forced to watch it by someone who loves the movie almost as much as I do.

In this person’s defense, this obviously uncultured human being happens to be a female. Granted, she’s a female who’s in her mid-20s — which makes the situation less understandable than if she were still a teenager — but a female nonetheless. Women simply don’t sit around and watch Die Hard just because they came across it on Fox Movie Channel, or have discussions about Die Hard that end up with someone — I’m not naming names — smashing a beer can on the ground in anger, or make appreciation threads about the original trilogy.

But even cured of this deficiency, she still hasn’t seen Robocop, Lethal Weapon, or Raiders of the Lost Ark. Her not seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark is particularly shocking since it’s such a classic, mainstream film. She might as well have told me she hasn’t seen Star Wars. It’s not even about the quality of Raiders of the Lost Ark (or any similar movie), but about its pervasiveness in popular culture. In some way this person AVOIDED seeing this movie.

I’m not immune to this phenomenon. The very person who hadn’t seen Die Hard was shocked, appalled, and disappointed to learn that the only David Lynch I had seen was the first hour or so of Dune (which was absolutely atrocious). But I’d argue that Lynch is not a mainstream figure, especially with my age group. Mullohand Drive is not airing on TNT or FX or some other cable channel every other week. Not that I’d want to watch it on these cable channels anyway (I’ve made a point of not watching any R-rated movies for the first time on cable for a long, long time now).

So no, I don’t think that’s the biggest hole in my film-watching history. In terms of popularity, it HAS to be It’s A Wonderful Life. I have never seen it, and that’s because I have never ever made it a priority — I might even avoid it. Perhaps my assumptions are wrong, but I don’t feel like watching some sappy crap on Christmas. I rather watch Die Hard.

Then there’s Lawrence of Arabia, a movie renowned for its cinematography — which is my reason for waiting until it hits Blu-ray. There I said it. I want it to be as beautiful as possible the first time. I’m saving myself.

But I don’t mean for this post to be about me or some poor Bruce Willis-deprived girl. I want this to be about the movies families sit around and watch, movies that teachers show their students, movies that both hipsters and dudebros have seen.

Unfortunately, a problem arises when I attempt to answer this question. I’m pretty sure that in my mind “universal” translates to “universal for 20-something-year-old male white Westerners”. So how do I approach the task of coming up with a list of these movies? First off, I’m going to make the uncontroversial statement that there are different lists for different groups. The list of definitive movies for my parents’ generation is going to be much different. But then again, aren’t I supposed to be talking about the movies that transcend all these generational and cultural boundaries? But I only truly know my own experiences, along with those of the people I interact with. So it goes in a massive loop, like this paragraph.

So you know what? I’m not going to bother trying to come up with some list of universal movies, because that’s just going to end up turning into a typical list of classic movies. Sure the most embarrassing holes in my movie knowledge are classics, but that’s me, a stupid wannabe blogger trying to know everything about everything (except anime). So I’m going to attempt to come up with some definitive list for the generation that grew up parallel to the internet; the generation born in the 80s; the generation that grew up with Transformers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

There’s a reason why Forrest Gump and Shawshank Redemption are staples of cable television. I’m not even sure I need to explain why stories featuring likable characters overcoming seemingly insurmountable odds are loved so much. The third film in the 1994 Oscar argument trifecta — Pulp Fiction – I don’t believe stands up to the other two in universal appeal nor cultural saturation. I have no doubt there are Christian sects out there who forbid their members to watch anything by Quentin Tarantino.

Then there’s two series that I can’t imagine anyone has avoided completely. The first would be the James Bond collection of movies and then the animated movies that fall under the “Pixar” label. I’m definitely stretching it a bit with the latter, but I think it’s pretty easy to lump them all together.

If someone didn’t see an older Connery or Dalton or Moore Bond film with their dad growing up, they probably saw Goldeneye, and if not then, they almost certainly saw Casino Royale. Even the ladies got in on that action, right? Daniel Craig had to pull in that demographic.

And Pixar? There’s Toy Story, Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Toy Story 2, and even Cars for redneck children! Ok, that’s unfair — rednecks born in the 80s were 15 when it came out. Among the people that didn’t see Toy Story when it came out, I bet a lot of them now have kids and leave Pixar movies in the DVD player for easy on-child’s-demand viewing.

Getting back to singular movies, Jurassic Park. That’s it. That’s the movie I’ve been trying to think of. It has goddamn DINOSAURS. And it’s the perfect year for 80s children. The age range goes from 13 to 3, with myself falling pretty much right in the middle. The first movie theater experience I can remember. It was fucking awesome and I’m sure any kid from 13 to 3, from whatever cultural background, would have eaten it up as well. Even for adults there’s a sense of wonder in the movie that, despite some definite issues with the movie, must have made that inital viewing extremely enjoyable. And what other movie has engrained in the collective consciousness what something should look like? Perhaps not intellectually, but at the most basic level, I truly believe Steven Spielberg’s idea of what dinosaurs look like is what they REALLY looked like. Anything else looks strange and wrong.

I can’t even think of something to compete with that. Sure, there are movies like The Matrix and Gladiator, but they still skew toward adolescent males. Hmm, Groundhog Day is a legitimate competitor. Something about it just lends itself to being watched over and over…

I think I’m about done with this disgustingly long, aimless blog post. I can’t even bring myself to wrap it up with some sort of meaningful or amusing conclusion. Just add your suggestions in the comments, alright?

I’ve been thinking about making Best of Decade posts for a month or so now, debating how to go about it — whether to just make lists or rambling contemplations, and how to spread them out across a bunch of posts. I’ve settled on separate posts for separate segments of entertainment, consisting of personal anecdotes and feelings about my decade’s experience in each form of time-wasting. They’ll all be somewhat chronological, so you can see my evolution and growth or lack thereof. I originally wanted to get this done BEFORE 2010 started, but that’s not going to happen now because I procrastinated like with every single other thing in my life. Except for one decision this year, and that turned out pretty well. But this is not about my laziness and neurotic failings, this is about stuff you watch on a screen. Let’s get this kicked off.

The decade starts with Gladiator, which I believe — mistakenly or not — was my first R-rated theater experience. If there were any before it, they were obviously unmemorable, or just paled in comparison to the glory of a sword-and-sandals spectacle to a 14-year-old male. And this was in a massive theater that is actually now closed down, beaten into submission by a new stadium-style seating multiplex. This old theater was a multiplex as well, but it had one theater that was absolutely immense, unlike the new multiplex where every theater is the same mediocre size. I only delve into this at all because it was the place of the some of the bigger movie experiences of my life — with Gladiator possibly still being the biggest. It was just so unbelievably epic and badass. I wanted to be Russell Crowe, I wanted to be slashing and stabbing competitor after competitor, I wanted to fight fucking tigers.

Recently, the internet has tried to convince me that Gladiator is actually a terrible movie. Fuck the internet, or more specifically NeoGAF. I’ve heard ridiculous things like Kingdom of Heaven: Director’s Cut is actually superior. Sorry, any film that stars Orlando Bloom cannot — by the laws of nature — be superior to one that stars Russell Crowe when they are in the same genre and directed by the same man. It’s science. Perhaps I haven’t matured enough to realize that Joaquin Phoenix’s Commodus is overacted or that the plot is straight out of Spartacus, but perhaps I just don’t care and still totally enjoy the movie because it’s so goddamn entertaining. I’ll refrain from quoting the line.

Time to go to Wikipedia to remember what came out in 2001…

Oh right, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. I’d say that was a huge theater experience as well. I admit I said at one point that it was better than Gladiator, but then upon watching it again at home, I rescinded this statement. It doesn’t make that first viewing any less amazing, as I was definitely blown away at the world that was created for that entire trilogy. But I enjoyed each successive installment less and less, culminating in the half-dozen endings for The Return of the King that had my entire group of friends complaining on the way home. That was brutal.

I’m gonna go ahead and mention Snatch in here right now. I’m not entirely sure when I saw it first — it came out in 2000 — but I’ve always absolutely loved it. Guy Ritchie gets a SHITLOAD of hate from critics and the internet alike, but I also loved Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and RocknRolla wasn’t too bad either. I should probably go ahead and see Sherlock Holmes then, huh? Snatch is my favorite of his so far, though — probably due to Brad Pitt’s character. It’s just pure fun from beginning to end. Whoever doesn’t like it is a joyless twat.

Then I guess I plodded along watching crappy movies for another year or so, until I rented The Bourne Identity. That totally rocked my world — Matt Damon as a super-trained killing machine? Woah, this was so much better than those stupid Bond movies, too! And evidently, EON Productions thought the same, since Casino Royale (and Quantum of Solace even moreso) took massive inspiration from the Bourne movies, and it was one of the best things to happen to movies this decade. So thank you, Bourne series — you not only gave us an awesome trilogy, you revitalized an entire other series. Really, the entire Bourne Trilogy deserves the bold + italic treatment. I can’t think of a more consistently great trilogy.

Any discussion of this decade wouldn’t be complete without the disappointment of the Matrix sequels. The Matrix Reloaded was supposed to be one of the big movies that I could look back on and remember how I experienced it in theaters, in that huge theater that’s now torn down, how it totally blew my mind. And you know what? It might have blown my mind a little bit. I did not hate Reloaded as much as many other people; I talked about that speech by the Architect at the end with my friends, trying to figure out what the hell was going on; I enjoyed the highway chase scene; and I had no complaint about Monica Bellucci having screentime. But so much was just a bit off, and it seemed just a bit too philosophical (well, maybe more than a bit). It was nicer not knowing what was truly going on behind the scenes. And it was nicer before the CG went totally overboard. Unfortunately, The Matrix Revolutions was such a total fucking disaster that I don’t even want to dedicate more than a sentence to it. It was so bad that it made Reloaded worse by association — although I feel the original Matrix is removed enough that it remains unscathed.

I guess 2003′s bright spot had to be Old School for me. Yes, out of that group of movies that includes Zoolander and Anchorman, I’m going with Old School. Zoolander is also pretty great, but I’m going on record and saying Anchorman is pretty awful. I don’t care if I like the line “It’s science” or “Milk was a bad choice” — the vast majority of the movie was fucking bad and I wanted to stab Will Ferrell repeatedly in the face. He’s good in supporting roles like, say, Old School or Zoolander! You’re not going to see Old School on any Best of Decade lists, and maybe I wouldn’t even enjoy it as much as I did 6 years ago, but fuck if my friends and I (and the entire theater) weren’t laughing at it more than any movie I could remember up until then. I don’t care if you call me a tasteless frat boy. The Royal Tenebaums sucks.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is my favorite movie of the decade, and I’ve only watched it three times. I watched it once in 2004, and it totally destroyed me. So much so that I didn’t watch it again until this year. That second viewing cemented its status, as it blew me away all over again — so much so that I watched it again a few months later. It’s fucking PERFECT. It’s brilliant, touching, depressing, imaginative, hilarious, original, beautiful, and heartbreaking. I don’t know what else you could want out of a film. Jim Carrey is at his painfully shy and neurotic best as Joel (hey, that’s my name!), while Kate Winslet plays a cute, quirky but also realistically crazy girl that provides him with some much-needed excitement. They have chemistry, but they’re not perfect. It eventually falls apart — like 99% percent of relationships. You see all this through a fragmented and out-of-order journey through Joel’s brain. Never have I seen an entire relationship summarized in a two-hour movie so perfectly before. I can’t even bring myself to write anymore, as it will just inspire me to watch it again. I just might. Charlie Kaufman is a fucking genius when someone else is directing his scripts.

The next couple of years brought two of my favorite comedies of the decade, The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Borat. Sure, the former gets a bit sappy at the end, but there are just too many amazing quotes packed into the first hour and a half. And Steve Carell was born to play that part. Borat was a totally different animal; I seriously couldn’t believe some of the stuff I was seeing or hearing, but it just about all worked. “Let’s go back to New York, there are no Jews there!” might have gotten the biggest laugh in my NY theater.

2007 had to be the best year I ever had in terms of theatrical movie watching. Children of Men — albeit technically a 2006 film — didn’t get a wide release until 2007 (when I saw it). That’s one movie I’m extremely glad I saw in theaters. The entire climatic scene running through the warzone at the end was incredible. And I’ve never heard a packed theater audience as quiet as when the fighting stopped due to the baby’s crying. Then there was There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men, the two movies that were pitted against each other in every internet argument and even in the Academy Awards. Both amazing movies from masterful directors, but I give the edge to the one starring Daniel Day-Lewis. Endings don’t make movies, but I left There Will Be Blood with my jaw dragging on the fucking ground.

Also, I feel like Gone Baby Gone was a underrated gem that year, and it seems almost totally forgotten now. Maybe people thought Ben Affleck couldn’t direct a decent film; I thought the same until I watched it. Then there was The Bourne Ultimatum and Hot Fuzz as well. The latter doesn’t get highlighted because the first half of the movie is a bit slow, and Shaun of the Dead is superior anyway. Absolutely love that movie.

We’re almost at the end, people! But not really, because I watched way too many good movies the past two years.

I really don’t think The Dark Knight is one of the best movies of this decade, but it gets highlighted because it was the American movie event of the decade — and it did live up the hype. It’s a very, very good movie, but just a bit bloated. The action scenes also could have been handled better. Nonetheless, Heath Ledger’s Joker will be talked about for decades and it did bring comic book movies to a new level. Oh yeah, it also made over $500 million in America and $1 billion total, breaking almost every record in sight. Christopher Nolan will have a blank check for the third installment, I’m sure.

While The Dark Knight got all the attention, In Bruges was quietly amazing. It’s both charming and vulgar, both hilarious and somber. It’s also brilliantly acted and brilliantly shot. A perfect dark comedy. Just go watch it. I swear, Colin Farrell is totally awesome in it. I’ll just slide Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang in here, as it’s another (not-quite-as) dark comedy. More of a buddy cop mystery comedy. I just didn’t know how to get it in here. Watch it. It has Robert Downey Jr. — I’m sure you love him.

Another movie better than The Dark Knight? Memento. Christopher Nolan’s first feature with a budget over $6,000, it’s a mindfuck of a film where the non-linear storytelling isn’t just masturbation. I can’t imagine the film any other way. It fucks with your mind like the mind of an amnesiac. And not any old type of amnesia, this is one where you can’t even remember 5 minutes ago. The twists come at you over and over, but they never feel contrived, and it all comes together so beautifully (or terribly) in the end. Possibly Inception will top it with regards to both mindfucking and quality — well, probably not, but we’ll see.

Martin Scorsese finally got his Oscar for The Departed, but he should have gotten it a few years before for The Aviator instead. Leonardo DiCaprio gives a great performance, as does Cate Blanchett — and Kate Beckinsale looks really gorgeous. It’s a triumph of spectacle filmmaking; it’s just a joy to watch.

I leave for last three movies from 2002 that I finally got around to watching this year: City of God, 28 Days Later, and 25th Hour. Not a bad threesome. City of God is easily the gangster movie of the decade, a kinetic, uncompromising portrait of the slums of Brazil. It’s such a powerful, unrelenting film. 28 Days Later is probably one of the most influential movies of the decade. The ingenious idea to transform zombies into fast moving, bloodthirsty savages by making it all due to a virus instead of some living dead bullshit has reverberated throughout popular culture. The remake of Dawn of the Dead featured fast-moving zombies, and the Left 4 Dead series has fast-moving “infected” — the term used in 28 Days Later. It helps that the movie is absolutely fantastic, even if the final act goes off the rails a bit. BUT, I feel like the third act is foreshadowed and relevant enough thematically that it ultimately works. It’s not like the other Danny Boyle-Alex Garland collaboration, Sunshine. Two-thirds of that movie could make this list, but holy shit what the fuck happened.

I only watched 25th Hour a couple of weeks ago due to seeing it pop up on so many of these very lists. I was not disappointed. Every character plays their role perfectly — except for Tony Siragusa — and the backdrop of 9/11 does provide some great perspective. There’s a reason why I think the movie is finally getting the recognition it deserves, and I think that looking Ground Zero right in the face might be it. It’s about a man’s last free day, but it’s also about New York City, and it paints a portrait that will be looked back on for a long time.

Meanwhile, this post will never be even looked on, at least not in its entirety.

So we all know IMDB, right? It’s pretty much THE site for movie information, arguably superior to even Wikipedia. You may have known that the site maintains a Top 250 list, compiled from user votes. The Dark Knight sitting at #4 is all you need to know when it comes to the people who are voting. The Shawshank Redemption at the top of the list is just as ridiculous, but it’s not a comic book movie that nerds eat up, so I can’t make condensing implications. I guess TNT and TBS showing it so many times as a NEW CLASSIC has convinced people of its transcendence. Rankings (and a few insane choices scattered around) aside, the list is a great starting point for anyone looking to truly delve into the history of popular films.

Here’s a little quiz to see how much delving you need to do:

It will automatically compare your results to mine.

So, did you beat my 38.8%?

The top ten movies I need to see according to the list are:

1. 12 Angry Men
2. Casablanca
3. Seven Samurai
4. City of God
5. Once Upon a Time in the West
6. Psycho
7. Sunset Blvd.
8. North by Northwest
9. It’s a Wonderful Life
10. Lawrence of Arabia

Not surprising to see 9/10 are pre-1970. To the Netflix queue they go. Except for It’s a Wonderful Life, as I’m sure I will stumble across it in the next couple of weeks, like I always do. I’ll try to stop myself from reverting to my usual ritual of watching Die Hard instead.