![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lookingcloser.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/07\/wingsofdesire-damiel.jpg\")
<\/a><\/h3>\nThis is a work in progress: a running list of my favorite films by year.<\/p>\n
2012 \u00a02011<\/a> 2010<\/a><\/p>\n 2009<\/a> \u00a02008<\/a> \u00a02007<\/a> \u00a02006<\/a> \u00a02005<\/a> \u00a02004<\/a> \u00a02003<\/a> \u00a02002<\/a> \u00a02001<\/a> \u00a02000<\/a><\/p>\n 1999<\/a> \u00a01998<\/a> \u00a01997<\/a> \u00a01996<\/a> \u00a01995<\/a> \u00a01994<\/a> \u00a01993<\/a> \u00a01992<\/a> \u00a01991<\/a> \u00a01990<\/a><\/p>\n 1989<\/a> \u00a01988<\/a> \u00a01987<\/a> \u00a01986<\/a> \u00a01985<\/a> \u00a01984<\/a> \u00a01983<\/a> \u00a01982<\/a> \u00a01981<\/a> \u00a01980<\/a><\/p>\n 1970s<\/a>\u00a0 1960s<\/a> 1950s<\/a> \u00a01940s<\/a> \u00a01930s<\/a> \u00a01920s<\/a><\/p>\n Organizing any film list is a challenge. Should I catalog films by year, like most people? If so, how do I \u00a0determine the release date? By its first screening anywhere in the world? By the first film festival screening? By the American commercial release date? What if it\u2019s made available online before it reaches theatres?<\/p>\n For simplicity\u2019s sake, I now list 1980-2012 movies by the year of the film\u2019s first showings as reported by IMDB (the Internet Movie Database).<\/strong><\/p>\n This puts my lists at odds with most other American film critics, who treat a film as if it is \u201creal\u201d when it reaches New York or L.A.<\/p>\n It means that my favorite moviegoing experience of 2011 \u2014 Certified Copy<\/em> \u2014 is now listed as my #1 film of 2010<\/strong> because the completed film was first presented to audiences<\/em> in 2010.<\/p>\n No doubt I still have some corrections to make, so if you see that I\u2019ve mistakenly repeated a title or categorized in the wrong place, please let me know.<\/p>\n Films released before 1980 are grouped by decade<\/strong>. That\u2019s because I have only recently started making concerted efforts to catch up on movies that I missed during childhood or that were released before I was born.<\/p>\n Before you peruse the lists, permit me to explain a little bit about what it actually represents.<\/strong><\/p>\n What makes you think you\u2019re an expert, Overstreet?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n I don\u2019t! I explore movies and I study them, but I\u2019m not a scholar.<\/p>\n Then why write reviews? Why make long lists like these?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n For 20 years I\u2019ve been writing reviews. Writing reviews helps think through what I\u2019ve seen.<\/p>\n Seeing a film for the first time is like meeting a stranger for the first time. I don\u2019t want to just meet<\/em>\u00a0works of art. I want to get to know them<\/em>. Sometimes they have little to say to me, or they\u2019re mean, or they\u2019re superficial, or they want to sell me something. Sometimes they turn out to be marvelous company, and I end up learning from them and revisiting them often. I make lists as a way of keeping track of which movies have been most rewarding for me, and which I\u2019d most like to spend time revisiting.<\/p>\n You know the word \u201cruminate\u201d? If so, you probably know where that word comes from. When animals \u201cruminate,\u201d they\u2019re chewing their meal again. I write about movies and discuss them in order to get more out of the experience, to glean rewards, to savor.\u00a0I started LookingCloser.org not so I would have a platform or a pulpit, but because I wanted to find others who were interested in discussing cinema as \u201cincarnation\u201d \u2014 the embodying of truth through the imagination. I\u2019m still learning a lot from that discussion, and I\u2019ve only scratched the surface of it.<\/p>\n Do these lists represent what you would call \u201cthe best movies\u201d?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n No.<\/p>\n When film critics announce that they\u2019ve decided \u201cthe best films of the year,\u201d I\u2019m immediately distrustful. I\u2019ve never met an individual who has that kind of authority. It\u2019s better to be humble about it. Why not call them \u201cfavorites\u201d?<\/p>\n Lists are personal things.\u00a0Our cinematic preferences say as much about our personalities, interests, aversions, and questions as they do about the films themselves. We\u2019re all distinct individuals and, to complicate matters further, we\u2019re all changing. So what we value, appreciate, and understand is going to change and grow as we do.<\/p>\n I wish I had a dollar for every time I\u2019ve heard a critic say, \u201cWell, it wasn\u2019t a\u00a0perfect<\/em> movie.\u201d Of course it wasn\u2019t! There are no perfect movies.\u00a0Movies are imperfect because they\u2019re made by imperfect people. It\u2019s not very worthwhile to declare whether a film is imperfect or not.\u00a0It is worthwhile, however, to talk about what impressed<\/em> us, what confused<\/em> us, what intrigued<\/em> us. Still, our relationship with any work of art will always be incomplete, unique, and subject to change.<\/p>\n Thus, whether we\u2019re rating movies with stars or points or thumbs,\u00a0there is no strict unit of measure that can tell us the value of a work of art.\u00a0We can talk about the virtues and faults of Schindler\u2019s List<\/em> or The Blair Witch Project<\/em>, but any kind of \u201cgrade\u201d or \u201cpoint system\u201d is severely insufficient and misleading.<\/p>\n Rating<\/em> movies is like rating food: Is a ham better than a strawberry? How can you compare the two?<\/p>\n A movie, like any work of art, is \u2014 as my high school English teacher used to say \u2014 both a Thing<\/em><\/strong> and a Way.<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0As a\u00a0Thing, <\/em>its craftsmanship can be examined, and we can discuss the quality of acting, soundtrack, editing, cinematography, composition, etc. As a Way, <\/em>it is an invitation to an experience, and each\u00a0traveler will find that movie inspiring different kinds of memories, challenges, questions, ideas, and lessons.<\/p>\n So in these lists, I have no authority to say which films are the \u201cbest.\u201d Nor do I judge movies based on whether I \u201cliked\u201d them.\u00a0I\u2019m taking into account whether the Thing <\/em>is excellent and worthy of praise, and I\u2019m also taking into account what I have experienced\u00a0on the Way<\/em> of the movie.<\/p>\n But isn\u2019t it all<\/em> subjective, this business of assessing what is excellent?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n No.<\/p>\n Some questions about movies are somewhat subjective:<\/p>\n \u2013 Was a director\u2019s decision to shoot in black and white a good one? These are matters of opinion.<\/p>\n Because of that subjectivity, we should listen to each other\u2019s opinions and preferences with respect, and offer our own with some humility.<\/p>\n But it would be wrong to say that there is no such thing as excellence.<\/p>\n Some aspects of film reviewing are far less subjective. For example, if the sound is poorly mixed, if the editing is sloppy\u2026 if there is evidence of laziness or thoughtlessness\u2026 or if we observe unethical treatment of actors, animals, or audiences\u2026 these are not very subjective matters. Most people know the difference between an actor and somebody who just speaks lines into a camera.<\/p>\n If somebody thinks that excellence is always just a matter of opinion, I\u2019d like to give them some choices: Would they like their open-heart surgery performed by an accomplished surgeon or a 12-year-old who knows how to play the game of Operation? <\/em>Would they like to hear a piano concerto performed by a famous pianist or by someone who\u2019s had one piano lesson?\u00a0I suspect that person\u2019s choice would demonstrate that they do believe in objective measures of excellence.<\/p>\n Your lists, like a lot of critics\u2019 lists, don\u2019t look anything like the box office reports. Are you saying you know better than the moviegoing public?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n I\u2019ll say this:<\/p>\n Most people will agree that the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone are \u201cgreat\u201d national parks, but a lot of people would rather go to an amusement park than a National Park. The most popular restaurants are obviously not the establishments that serve the greatest meals. People tend to choose donuts over spinach salad. Appreciating great art is a matter of growing up. When we\u2019re children, we dislike a lot of the food and drink that we learn to appreciate and favor later. I hated both coffee and asparagus when I was a kid. But I learned, gradually, that the adults weren\u2019t just trying to trick me. Coffee and asparagus are wonderful things. When I look at what\u2019s popular at the box office, I think it shows us that we are a people of childish interests. Growing up a little would be good for us.<\/p>\n Most people think critics are crazy when they talk about \u201cthe great films.\u201d That\u2019s because most people don\u2019t have the patience to discover the greatest rewards that movies have to offer.\u00a0They want instant, familiar gratification. Americans tend to treat movies like junk food, and that\u2019s why we\u2019re now getting our movies out of Redbox vending machines instead of renting them from a neighborhood store, like the one where I used to work and have long conversations with neighbors and introduce them to challenging new filmmakers.<\/p>\n Recognizing greatness takes time, even for the most thoughtful moviegoers. Most critics will agree that Citizen Kane<\/em>, Tokyo Story<\/em>, and Andrei Rublev<\/em> are essential works of cinema, but the greatness of those masterpieces has been recognized over time<\/em>, through countless viewings and discussions, through examinations under many different critical lenses. Blade Runner<\/em> was not well-regarded when it first opened; now it\u2019s often called a science fiction masterpiece. 2001: A Space Odyssey was not even nominated for Best Picture, but now it\u2019s viewed as one of the crowning achievements of cinema. A movie\u2019s greatness may go unrecognized by a casual moviegoer who goes to the movies on Friday night with certain expectations, desiring something easy and familiar, and equating \u201cgreatness\u201d with \u201cfun\u201d or positive emotions.<\/p>\n Most people wouldn\u2019t sit through Tokyo Story<\/em>, or Yi-Yi<\/em>, or Certified Copy<\/em>, or\u00a0Into Great Silence<\/em>, or many of the films that have become my favorites over time. But then, when I was younger, I wouldn\u2019t have appreciated those films either.<\/p>\n Having said all of that, I do like a good candy bar now and then. Sometimes I get cravings for an Almond Joy or M&Ms with pretzels. I\u2019m also fond of Die Hard<\/em>, Fletch<\/em>, and Spider-man 2<\/em>. These movies aren\u2019t bad. But we can turn them into damaging influences if we make a steady diet of them, or fail to think about what they and how they are made.<\/p>\n Okay, enough about subjectivity and excellence. How does your rating system work?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n I offer these lists and classifications as tentative summaries of personal experience. <\/strong>Nothing more.\u00a0They\u2019re expressions of enthusiasm and gratitude to some artists, and expressions of respectful acknowledgement (but not enthusiasm) for others. They reflect a combination of the excellence I see in each Thing<\/em>, and the experience I had on the path of each Way<\/em>. Thus, my choices say as much or more about me as they do about the films in question.<\/strong><\/p>\n I don\u2019t attach \u201cratings\u201d to reviews, though, because I\u2019d rather have people\u00a0read my review<\/em> to get a sense of my experience.\u00a0Think about it: If I served you a delicious strawberry on Monday, and a Thanksgiving feast on Tuesday, and then asked you to rate them on a scale of 1-5, what would you do if they were both excellent? Five stars for both of them? Are you saying a good strawberry is equal to a good Thanksgiving dinner? It doesn\u2019t make sense.<\/p>\n So, these aren\u2019t ratings. They\u2019re recommendations! Right?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n No.\u00a0I might love a movie for how it changed my life, and still be careful to avoid recommending it to certain people based on what\u2019s in it. And here I go with another food metaphor: I may enjoy a well-made peanut butter sandwich, but I have friends who will get sick if I serve them peanut butter.<\/p>\n Recommendations are for individuals. Recommending a movie to a crowd is like a pair of shoes to a crowd of people. What is useful and comfortable for some people could be harmful for others.<\/p>\n Are the lists finished?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n No. I\u2019m changing, so the lists will change too. I revise them often.<\/p>\n I just noticed that you listed one movie twice. And you overlooked one of my favorites. What do I do?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Email me.<\/strong> Feel free to point out errors or omissions. If you notice that a film is not listed among my favorites or among the titles I have not seen, that means I\u2019ve overlooked it or I saw it and didn\u2019t care for it.<\/p>\n The lists are numbered and color-coded.<\/p>\n The numbers<\/strong> list my Top 25 of each year, in an approximate order of my gratitude for the experience.<\/p>\n The colors<\/strong> are a general expression of how<\/em> grateful I am, how much<\/em> I appreciate and value them. (If I were to offer a list of my all-time favorite movies, I\u2019d be drawing from the red-letter \u201ctreasures.\u201d Some years didn\u2019t produce anything I\u2019d consider \u201ctreasure.\u201d)<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n This is a work in progress: a running list of my favorite films by year. 2012 \u00a02011 2010 2009 \u00a02008 \u00a02007 \u00a02006 \u00a02005 \u00a02004 \u00a02003 \u00a02002 \u00a02001 \u00a02000 1999 \u00a01998 \u00a01997 \u00a01996 \u00a01995 \u00a01994 \u00a01993 \u00a01992 \u00a01991 \u00a01990 1989 \u00a01988 \u00a01987 \u00a01986 \u00a01985 \u00a01984 \u00a01983 \u00a01982 \u00a01981 \u00a01980 1970s\u00a0 1960s 1950s \u00a01940s \u00a01930s \u00a01920s AN […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1051,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[387],"class_list":["post-77709","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-film-reviews-journal","tag-top-10-or-20"],"yoast_head":"\nAN INTRODUCTION:<\/strong><\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/h3>\nWHAT THE LIST MEANS: Q&A<\/strong><\/h3>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Should the voice-over narration have been eliminated?
\n\u2013 Was a performance too understated, or too flamboyant?
\n\u2013 Is the movie boring, or is it asking us to pay close attention?
\n\u2013 Was the non-chronological storytelling confusing or revealing?
\n\u2013 Must a movie have a clear and compelling narrative, or can movies work in other ways like impressionist paintings or poetry?<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/h3>\nCOLOR-CODED GUIDE TO THE LISTS<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\nFilms that have profoundly inspired, influenced, and affected me. I want all of them in my personal collection for future reference. Why are they red?<\/strong> They\u2019re like Moses\u2019 burning bush, always blazing, never consumed, and they\u2019ve given me close encounters with something sacred.<\/li>\n
\nFilms I will probably never tire of revisiting, studying, sharing, and discussing. Why are they purple?<\/strong> Among films, I consider them royalty.<\/li>\n
\nFilms worth seeing more than once, studying, sharing, and discussing. Why are they blue?<\/strong> To a rain-soaked Seattle-dweller like myself, blue is a reason to celebrate.<\/li>\n
\nFilms worth seeing once, maybe twice, due to their strong points. Why are they grey?<\/strong>\u00a0They may be enjoyable while they\u2019re playing, but they didn\u2019t make a strong, lasting impression.<\/li>\n
\nFilms I haven\u2019t seen, or else I can\u2019t remember what I thought of them\u2026 but they\u2019ve been recommended to me by friends or reputable critics. If the right opportunity comes along, I\u2019ll check them out. Why are they green?<\/strong> I look at them as \u201cthe grass on the other side of the fence.\u201d Or, perhaps, an undiscovered pasture where I can graze in future days.<\/li>\n
\nThose are those that received either a festival-only release or an extremely limited release during their year. Many of these films I didn\u2019t see until after the year of their release, and I had to go back and revise that year\u2019s list.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n2012<\/h2>\n
(This list is under construction, and won\u2019t be rated in numerical order until January 2013.)<\/h4>\n
\n
\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022\u2022<\/h2>\n
Want to respond? Visit Jeffrey on Facebook<\/a>, Twitter<\/a>, and Tumblr<\/a>.<\/h6>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"