The Tweets Are All Right

Those of you who aren't familiar with my Twitter account — or with Twitter at all for that matter — then you're missing out! I say this because it may help in gaining understanding of some of the grades on the sidebar, especially since some of my opinions are at fierce odds with the critical majority. Within 48 hours of seeing a film I usually grade it and provide a little 140-character summary tweet, although some 2010 features are without one, either because a) I only really started to do them in the summer or b) I simply forgot about it.

There isn't a summary of "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World", which probably best represents my relative hatred for a film that was universally acclaimed. Therefore, let me take the opportunity to say that listing someone's attributes and weaknesses to bypass characterisation doesn't sit very well with me. (Consider that a summary if you wish - I count it as 141 characters if you start from "let".)

In any case, here are my original within-48-hours reactions to the films, some of which (in terms of qualitative assessment) have altered slightly.

"127 Hours," C+ : Thank God I knew that bottle of Gatorade was in the back of the van. Pedantic doesn't ever cover it. Boyle needs HELP.

"The American," B : Somewhat plods through familiar terrain, but tight characterisation and gorgeous craftsmanship win out.

"Animal Kingdom," B+ : Ruminative thriller about murky moral consciences that evades cliché and indulgence in hero. Mendelsohn is King.

"Another Year," B: Pacing issues and a couple of dodgy characters mar this depiction of people punished for rejecting old-age.

"Buried," C– : Tagline should be Cellular-esque: "If the signal dies, so does he". Cortes concocts, attacking everything in sight.

"The Disappearance of Alice Creed," C : Just how many stupid women did Gemma Arterton play this year? Gutsy but convoluted, absurd trash.

[Downgraded to C– upon reflection]

"Essential Killing," C : A promising start wasted when it becomes clear that this is little more than an exercise in degradation. Stingy business.

"Frozen," B– : Inconsistent, but quietly astute, riveting stuff. I want to marry Shawn Ashmore.

"Get Low," C– : Schneider doesn't have a clue how to implement backstory. Dour, unassumingly trite lament of old-age.

"The King's Speech," C : Couldn't the BBC have knocked this up for a sliver of the budget? Droll, drawn out, merciless storm in a teacup.

"Last Train Home," B+ : Narrative too orchestrated, but it's a harrowing portrait of poverty. Benefits from Fan's intrusive style.

"Monsters," B– :Meditative with themes rather than manic; achieves poignancy, but not in the way it most wants to. Beautiful, though.

"The Refuge," B– : Guiltily downgraded. Moments of tenderness & character obfuscation stir, but is it an easy way out? Carre wows.

"Restrepo," B– : Conceals sparseness of footage through interview overkill, but it's organically made; candid even.

"Secretariat," C : Stirs emotions, but mainly through seeping sentiment out of every pore. Like the horse, gets better as it goes.

"The Social Network," B+ : Brisk roundabout style works well, and it's not SO determinate. Jesse, Andy impress; flaming trash cans don't.

"Splice," C– : Artificially novel, bizzarely trite. Interesting for a time, but clichéd, and handles Brody character all wrong.

"The Tourist," D : Drags an underdeveloped plot through 95 mins; gives Depp and Jolie horribly 2D characters to sell. They don't. Dire.

"Unstoppable," B : Its star duo aren't that believable, and the token subplots are annoying, but it's SUCH a showstopper. Awesome.

[Upgraded to B+ upon reflection]

"Wild Target," C : Proof that continental humour is difficult to replicate. Blunt is appealing, but it's largely absurd and lax.

[Downgraded to C– upon reflection]

Of course, if you have me on Twitter you'll probably have read these already.

Which 2009 Films Need A Repeat Viewing?

It often goes that after I watch a film I consider its merits for a couple of days. On some occasions I know minutes after I've seen it how I feel about it, and how "good" I think it is, but usually at least twenty-four hours rumination is called for. At the end of the year, after 81 films (just 19 left to see) I'm beginning to reflect on grades from earlier in the year and wondering whether they add up. Here are the assessments I'm particularly doubting...

Antichrist (Current Grade: B+): Yeah, does anyone really need to see this again? I don't intend to buy the film so it may be a while until a repeat viewing. Having said that, I'm very curious as to whether it plays out as powerfully visceral as it did first time around.

Broken Embraces (Current Grade: B+): I marvelled at how Almodovar completely took the piss out of his fondness for trashy melodrama and implemented it into what was a thrilling story of a disastrous love affair. Most people I speak to about this have the opinion that it's average Almodovar at best. I don't know whether to take that as a) an indictment of how much the man has built a reputation, b) a matter of the film's soap-opera style appealing to my tastes more than others, or c) a sign that I over-estimated Broken Embraces a little?

Inglourious Basterds (Current Grade: B): Are those three amazing, unendingly tense scenes still enough to deter the obvious incoherence and crazy final act?

Mr. Nobody (Current Grade: A-): I walked out of the Venice screening of Jaco Van Dormael's Mr. Nobody feeling as if I'd witnessed something titanic; a film that said more about the ever-changing nature of space and time than anything I learned in my degree, and simultaneously managed to make its lecture so fluid, visually enticing and luscious. I confess that I even missed the last moments of the film, and my memory of it as a whole becomes much more hazy. It doesn't look as if the film will get a cinema release here, and it so it seems that I will have to wait a few months until the inevitable straight-to-DVD move occurs. A real shame, actually.

Precious (Current Grade: C+): I felt like Precious was adapted and made as if it took everything for granted. It tries to hark back to an era of gritty urbania with the clumsiness of early black teen comedy, but has none of the soul, and with its production heavies behind it the casting of Mo'Nique and Mariah Carey as if they were plucked from an inner city stage school feels particularly disingenuous. As if Daniels' manic, thoughtless direction wasn't bad enough the character of Mary is handled with such narrow-mindedness that ends in a scene that reeked of sell-out. Convince me I'm wrong.

Thoughts on any of these would be appreciated. Also: are there any grades on the sidebar you find suspect? I like to be urged into rewatching things.