1997 Movies Ranked

<< 1996    1998 >>

1997 wasn’t a very good year for movies.  Two formerly great directors of the 80’s sold out and made two soulless, formulaic bores which received heaps of undeserved acclaim.  Chris Farley died.  Two respectable French directors tried their hands at science fiction and failed miserably.  George Lucas released the Star Wars Special Edition, drawing first blood in his ongoing war against his fans and everything that once made him a great filmmaker.  Batman & Robin happened.  So did Anaconda.  But that doesn’t mean there weren’t some good movies…

20. Anaconda

D: Luis Llosa

**********

Infamously cheesy movie with some bad CGI.

19. The Relic

D: Peter Hyams

**********

Late 90’s monster movie.  Bafflingly, the movie was actually #1 at the box office, and critics like Siskel, Ebert and Maltin gave it a pass for some reason.  At least Stan Winston made some good creature effects for it.

18. Spawn

D: Mark A.Z. Dippe

**********

A foolish movie with some terrible CGI.

17. The Lost World: Jurassic Park

D: Steven Spielberg

**********

Insulting and stupid sequel to a nostalgic classic.  Has little to do with the book.  But then again, the book was the result of Crichton being pressured into a sequel by Spielberg and fans and features Dodgson and two random guys trying to follow up their clever plan in the original by personally stealing dinosaur eggs.

16. Con Air

D: Simon West

**********

While having some fun, cheesy moments of Nicolas Cage being himself, it was a pretty awful movie.  The hero’s sentence would never have happened except maybe in Oregon, and then there was Steve Buscemi’s character arc.  A serial child murderer, he’s arguably the most evil person on that plane and yet we’re supposed to have some connection with him just because he’s not involved with the plot and he’s Steve Buscemi (which granted granted, makes him hard to hate).  He gets a happy ending thanks to a redemption that’s even more forced and nonsensical than Princess Luna’s.


15. The Postman

D: Kevin Costner

**********

A bland movie with some brief moments.

14. Alien: Resurrection

D: Jean-Pierre Jeunet

**********

A pretentious mess that lacks even Alien³’s virtues.  A waste of a good cast which includes Michael Wincott, Ron Perlman and Brad Dourif.  I’m not even sure if we’re supposed to sympathize with that disgusting newborn alien, but I would be insulting if we were.  Jeunet is an amusingly quirky director, but he was a poor choice for this franchise.

13. Titanic

D: James Cameron

**********

This is why I hate the Academy Awards.  Because James Cameron showed ingenuity and skill in making Terminator, Terminator 2 and Aliens and this…this is what he gets an Oscar for.  Gets offensive and formulaic.  The biggest problem is the hackish belief that a movie about the Titanic needed villains.  It's at least well-executed enough to be watchable.  At least Cameron deserved his Best Director Oscar for this.

12. Batman & Robin

D: Joel Schumacher

**********

While I do prefer the darker Batman, I would have appreciated the campy interpretation more if the jokes were actually funny like they were in the 1966 movie. 

11. The Fifth Element

D: Luc Besson

**********

I think this movie was just another example of the Sci-fi Slump of the 90’s.  They wasted Gary Oldman on a villain who was annoying and had baffling motivation, and I found the visual style tacky.  I see the appeal, though.  It’s got some funny moments, but it’s a style-over-substance movie whose style I don’t like. 

10. Anastasia

D: Don Bluth, Gary Goldman

**********

It’s funny how Don Bluth left Disney because he thought they were making the same films over and over and then eventually makes the same movie Disney was making over and over.  It’s also funny how this was a far bigger critical and commercial success than Cats Don’t Dance, and that movie is now far more respected among animation fans.  The formulaic story is bad enough, but the implication that Russian citizens revolted against the czar because they were brainwashed by a wizard as opposed to having actual problems is extremely offensive.  At least the movie has good animation and some really good songs.

9. Tomorrow Never Dies

D: Roger Spottiswoode

**********

The movie is brought down by the villain's obviously being a spoof of Ted Turner/Bill Gates, it's still a solid action movie, and the remote-controlled BMW 750i is one of the best Bond Cars there is.  It's also pretty fun to see Bond kill Ted Turner.  

8. Liar Liar

D: Tom Shadyac

**********

One of Jim Carrey’s more entertaining comedies.

7. Waiting for Guffman

D: Christopher Guest

**********

Not as funny as Spinal Tap or Best in Show, but it’s a solid addition to Guest’s filmography.

56. Cats Don’t Dance

D: Mark Dindal

**********

Underrated and entertaining cartoon about a lovable group of anthros trying to make it in Hollywood has recently earned a cult following among animation fans.

5. Men in Black

D: Barry Sonnenfeld

**********

The closest thing to a great sci-fi movie between T2 and The Matrix.  It’s not a serious scifi movie and it doesn’t have much visual atmosphere, but it’s got some good characters and some good humor.

4. Jackie Brown

D: Quentin Tarantino

**********

Probably Tarantino’s most underrated movie.  I think the relative commercial failure of this movie is why he gave up on making movies with solid storylines and starting making more superficially fun films.

3. Orgazmo

D: Trey Parker

**********

Hilarious satire of porn by the creators of South Park.  I also like the theme song. 

2. Amistad
D: Steven Spielberg
**********
Certainly deserved the Oscar more than Titanic.

1. Princess Mononoke

D: Hayao Miyazaki

**********

Imagine if Fern Gully and Pocahontas actually had intelligent, complex storytelling,and this is what you get.

<< 1996   1998 >> 

1998 Movies Ranked

<< 1997    1999 >>


Obviously, there's a lot less movies per year since back then I couldn't go see movies whenever I felt like it.  Oddly enough, a lot of great 90's movies don't get much credit nowadays.

20. Buffalo ‘66

D: Vincent Gallo

**********

Another boring, art film passed off as a comedy despite not actually being one.  What passes for “jokes” are pointless filler and a flashback where the protagonist’s father brutally breaks a puppy’s neck in front of a child.  Said protagonist is unlikable, the pacing is awful and the female lead succumbs to Stockholm Syndrome.  I’d compare to Lost in Translation, except that was actually a technically good movie.  It doesn’t help knowing that Gallo reportedly mocked Christina Ricci mercilessly for an alleged weight problem.

19. Antz

D: Eric Darnell, Tim Johnson

**********

This overrated movie is every weak point in CGI cartoons in one place.  Attention-starved casting of celebrities in voice roles, lazy metahumor and off-putting character designs.  I guess this type of movie was a novelty back then, but I thought everyone would eventually realize the movie was stupid with time.

18. The Brave Little Toaster Goes to Mars

D: Robert C. Ramirez

**********

An utterly insane animated film and an ignominious final role for DeForest Kelley.

17. Star Trek: Insurrection

D: Jonathan Frakes

**********

Probably the worst in the series.  Our heroes prevent the spread of lifesaving material on behalf of a group of people who are hoarding it for themselves by pretending that they’re a primitive native culture in order to cheat the Prime Directive.

16. Lost in Space

D: Stephen Hopkins

**********

Bad story and atrocious CGI, but at least it had a goodcover of the theme song.

15. Armageddon

D: Michael Bay

**********

Awesome score.  Bad movie.

14. Elizabeth

D: Shekhar Kapur

**********

For some reason, my high school constantly showed this movie to me.  While cinematically well-made, it’s highly inaccurate and way too biased toward Elizabeth and the Protestants.  When you’re dealing with such a sensitive subject, you should make sure that you’re getting the material correct. 

13. The Swan Princess: Escape from Castle Mountain

D: Richard Rich

**********

Just another underwhelming direct-to-video sequel, except this one is actually no worse than the original.  The villain song is particularly absurd.

12. The Secret of NIMH 2: Timmy to the Rescue

D: Dick Sebast

**********

A watered-down direct-to-video bastardization of my favorite animated movie.  I still like Jenny, though.

11. There’s Something About Mary

D: The Farrelly Bros.

**********

I’d like to say that Farrelly Bros. movies are crude, but I can’t help finding some of them funny.  Apparently Matt Dillon's supposed to be some sort of heartthrob, but he'll always be that creep P.I. to me.

10. Deep Rising

D: Stephen Sommers

**********

A funny, cheesy camp horror film.  Treat Williams is enjoyable as a poor man’s Bruce Campbell, and those gatling rifles are pretty cool, too.  The film gets genuinely scary only when you realize that it has a following among vore fetishists.

9. The Lion King II: Simba’s Pride

D: Darrell Rooney

**********

While the movie did have a good villain with a good villain song, it was mostly underwhelming.  I think Kovu was supposed to be Scar’s son until someone realized that he’s related to his love interest.  That’s why the movie seems determined to convince us that he’s not Scar’s son even though he has his exact color pattern.

8. BASEketball

D: David Zucker

**********

A very funny sports comedy starring the creators of South Park.  Possibly Zucker’s last good movie. 

7. The Big Lebowski

D: The Coen Bros.

**********

Great characters and sharp dialogue make this my favorite funny movie of all time.

6. Mulan

D: Tony Bancroft, Barry Cook

**********

Overall, a good animated movie, but it’s the villain who makes the movie stand out.  Shan Yu is one of the wittiest, most intimidating and most underrated of the Disney villains.

5. Dark City
D: Alex Proyas
**********
This movie's dark, atmospheric style makes it one of the best sci-fi movies.


4. Ronin
D: John Frankenheimer
**********
A thrilling actioner with great characters, car chases and twists.

3. The Prince of Egypt

D: Simon Wells, Brenda Chapman, Steve Hickner

**********

Visually beautiful rendition of the Exodus that brings out the humanity of Moses and Rameses.  Does the drama well and is vastly superior to The Ten Commandments.  My only complaint is that there are some silly cartoony parts that stick out like a sore thumb.  It's hard to believe Dreamworks made this the same year they crapped out Antz.

2. Saving Private Ryan

D: Steven Spielberg

**********

The movie whose brutal depictions of combat made virtually every war movie made before it look like a joke.

1. Soldier
D: Paul W.S. Anderson
**********
Rewatched it and like it.  Though it has some tacky stylistic choices and the latter benefits from better directing, it's a better idea for a Blade Runner spin-off than 2049.

<< 1997    1999 >>

When Bad Endings Happen to Good Movies, Pt. 1

Superman

1978

D: Richard Donner

**********

Pros: Distinctive visuals, Solid first act, Good acting, Charismatic villain, Excellent score

Cons: Badly executed protagonists, Flawed villainous plan, Awful ending

     I know it’s fashionable to say that Batman is a much better character than Superman.  The logic behind this belief is that Batman relies on his intelligence and ingenuity rather than superpowers, and that Superman is allegedly dumb because of this.  Of course, this ignores the fact that Batman also has the ultimate superpower (a bottomless bank account, which his parents left him) and a traumatic childhood experience.  Don’t get me wrong, I love Batman, but I find Superman a perfectly identifiable character himself when he’s handled right (like he is in Superman: The Animated Series).  While Batman fights crime partially to deal with his own personal demons, Superman does so because it’s the right thing to do and because he has the power to do it.  He’s essentially just a normal guy who’s been given extraordinary powers and he’s trying to do the best he can with them.  Granted, many writers, influenced by quasi-Nietzchian philosophy, have ignored this dynamic (Frank Miller, I’m looking at you).  I think the true reason that Batman is more popular is that he’s just had better luck in being adapted onto TV and film.

     Superman: The Movie illustrates my point, even though it starts out quite promising.  The movie’s memorable opening has an excellent theme song composed by John Williams.  It pretty much goes without saying that the score is one of the most iconic and enjoyable movie themes out there, and the opening credits really gets the viewer excited for what’s to come.  The first scene takes place on Krypton, where Jor-El (Marlon Brando) sentences General Zod (Terence Stamp) to the Phantom Zone. Zod foreshadows the upcoming sequel by threatening Jor-El and his family.  What’s interesting about this scene is how it was shot from different angles and then shown from those angles in the sequel, which was filmed about the same time.  I love the scenes on Krypton for their distinctive visual style.  The monochromatic theme, ethereal lighting and practical sets give it an otherworldly feel.  I will mention that I love practical effects from the 70’s and 80’s.  Others may find them dated, but I really appreciate how much they did without CGI, and each effect has its own look that sets it apart.  I wish I’d see more of this today, since most of the modern CGI effects look the same to me.   

Although one wonders where Kal-El's red cape/blanket comes into this.

     Everyone knows the story from here.  Jor-El, unable to convince the authorities that Krypton will explode, sends his son Kal-El to Earth, where he is raised as Clark Kent and becomes Superman.  The first act, which deals with Clark’s time in Smallville, is well executed.  While he is a young man, we see him yearning for something more, and he is confused by some of the powers he displays.  He is driven to find a new life for himself after his adoptive father dies of a heart attack, and soon after this he discovers the truth about his heritage.   

     This is where the movie starts to go south.  There is a disconnect between the Clark Kent at the beginning of the movie and the Superman of its second half.  Much better interpretations of this franchise have found a way to balance both sides of the character.  For example in The Animated Series, Kent reacts with disbelief and initial aversion to discovering that he is an alien.  Once he comes to terms with the revelation, he embraces his status as the last Kryptonian while still remembering that he was raised on Earth and brought up with its values.  In the movie, he hears Jor-El’s “you’re better than those silly Earthlings” nonsense and just completely accepts it without question.  It’s not very believable, and I always believe that much of Superman’s values come just as much from his adoptive parents as they did from Jor-El.  Henceforth, Superman acts subtly smug and arrogant toward the humans under his protection.  Quentin Tarantino may get a lot of flak for Bill’s interpretation of Superman in Kill Bill: Vol. 2, but in the context of this movie, it’s not a bad assessment.    

     The problem isn’t the late Christopher Reeve, who does an amazing job as Superman.  He’s great at playing three aspects of the same character: the young Clark Kent, the dashing Superman, and the nerdy adult Clark Kent.  He was particularly good at the last one, where he carries himself in such a way that you could really believe that he was able to pass himself off as a completely different person with just a pair of glasses.  That’s good acting.  In fact, every member of the cast does a great job with what they’re given.  Margot Kidder is good as Lois Lane, even though I dislike her character in this movie.  The movie goes a bit far in its homage to the classic era of Superman by including the patronizing view toward women.  I know that in the original comics, Lois Lane was often depicted as often trying to fail at exposing Superman for laughs, but this movie was made in the Late 70’s.  There’s no excuse for not trying to depict the relation between Kent/Superman and Lane in a more mature light.  When you make an adaptation, you stay faithful to what worked, and you improve the inferior aspects of the original.  It gets even worse when they depict Lois as not even being able to spell basic words like “rapist.”  It’s not like you need that to be a journalist.  While the characterizations of Superman and Lois Lane are off-putting, they are not quite bad enough to ruin the movie.  After all, the former is fighting the good fight, and the latter…well…she doesn’t murder anyone.

     The villainy in this movie comes from Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman), who is very witty and extra memorable with his tacky coiffure.  He’s especially amusing when he’s chiding his dim-witted sidekick Otis (Ned Beatty, who’s just as good at playing buffoons as he is at corrupt authority figures).  His plan involves nuking California off the planet after buying cheap desert land which will become the new West Coast.  Of course, how he expects this to become a popular real estate destination after he’s murdered most of the potential customers is a mystery, especially considering the fact that this land is now directly east of a nuclear fallout zone.  Yeah, it’s a pretty stupid plan.  Just as silly is the ghetto way he executes it: by sneaking a bug onto a nuke in plain sight on the road.  I prefer powerful corporate authority Lex.  Still, even this logistical plothole isn’t enough to ruin the movie for me.

THIS FUCKING SCENE, HOWEVER...

     Yes, the iconic turning-back-the-world scene.  Long story short, Luthor diverts a missile and Superman rescues a whole bunch of people from a resultant earthquake.  During this time, Lois is smothered in her car after being too dumb to get out of it, causing Superman some grief.  He then flies around the world, somehow reversing time and rescuing Lois.  Admittedly, the visuals for this scene look great, but I still hate it.  For many people the ultimate moment of failure in a comic book movie is the infamous Bat Credit Card from Batman & Robin.  But then again, that was just a stupid throwaway joke in a movie that sucked anyway, not a painfully atrocious deus ex machina that ruined what otherwise would have been a decent movie.  That’s right.  I just said this is worse than the Bat Credit Card.  It’s funny how I often hear people writing off movies with fun action scenes for having “invincible heroes,” but I never hear anyone complaining about this scene.  This doesn’t just show a lack of vulnerability or suspense, it removes any conceivable possibility of it.  It destroys anything that even remotely resembles a serious stake in the movie.  How am I supposed to be invested in a movie when the protagonist can just turn back time whenever things don’t go his way and is therefore unable to experience any potential loss? 

     Not only that, it makes no sense.  Yes, I know this is a comic book movie, and I can suspend my belief enough to accept that a man can fly.  I can even believe that he can fly fast enough around the Earth to reverse its rotation, but you cannot make me believe that you can reverse time itself just by moving a physical object backward.  Hell, even when Calvin & Hobbes made a reference to it, Stupendous Man merely made it Saturday again, which if he had reversed Earths position, technically would have happened, even without reversing the passage of time itself.  The scene also has the mother of all time paradoxes.  If Superman went back to save Lois, did he retroactively unsave all those people because he cared more about his sweetheart than them?  Are there two Supermen during that time?  However, by removing himself from the planet, did he remove himself from the time reversal, allowing all of his heroic actions to occur unencumbered?  If the time reversal affected everything on the planet, except Superman, who was in orbit, how did his rescue of that city even get reversed in the first place?  That would have caused quite a paradox.

     I must note that I never really liked this idea of giving Superman truly god-like powers over space and time.  Superman has his powers as a result of the way his alien body reacts to its environment (i.e. yellow sunlight).  In other words, he’s subject to his surroundings.  I do believe in the classic Superman powers (flight, strength, near invulnerability, cold breath, heat vision), but punching reality is too much for me.  One might say that I can’t just hate a movie for its ending, but that’s hogwash.  I single scene can destroy a movie, especially if it’s something as crucial as the ending.

EDIT
I know that The Nostalgia Critic made the same complaint years ago, but this is still my opinion.

       

I Like Zaxby's Better Anyway.

NOTE: I am mostly using the term “liberal” out of convenience.  I’m not lumping all liberals in with these internet liberals whose fanaticism I disapprove of.

     Before I get decried as a homophobe (which, according to the internet, is worse than being a zoophilic Nazi child molester), I must point out that I have no personal objection to homosexuals.  Considering my own various kinks and fetishes, it would be pretty hypocritical if I did.  I do not oppose gay rights.  I believe in Separation of Church and State, and I don’t think defining marriage as a heterosexual institution is the government’s business.  But, oh wait, a chicken restaurant chain DISAGREES WITH ME?  Somebody declare Martial Law!

     Yes, everybody’s been following the Chik Fil-A controversy now.  After its president Dan Cathy publicly stated the company does not support Gay Marriage, many liberals got offended.  Their resultant boycott backfired hilariously.  There’s nothing wrong with boycotting something on ideological grounds or a company pulling its support of another for the same reason, but it’s funny just how bad these people are at it.  When gay rights advocates overhyped their boycott, they apparently forgot that this a divisive issue and calling attention to the fact that Chik Fil-A has taken a position on it will encourage many people to support the chain.  It certainly doesn’t help when you angst about how good you think the food actually is.

     Part of me finds this quite amusing.  The fact that liberals’ apparent love for something conflicts with their ideology just makes me feel warm and happy inside.  This is because I, as a conservative fanboy, am cursed by the fact that nearly every damn artist out there whose work I admire is completely incompatible with me ideologically.  With a few comforting exceptions (like Sam Raimi), most of the celebrities that do agree with me are worthless.  Liberals need to know the sting of a Hollywood letdown.  They deserve that pain.

     As I said before, I don’t have a problem with someone boycotting Chik Fil-A; that’s their First Amendment right.  However, the Left crossed the line when mayors like Rahm Emmanuel announced that they would not even allow Chik Fil-A to open restaurants in their cities.  Libertarian attitudes toward gay marriage suddenly become less relevant when its advocates begin to encroach on the more vital right of Free Speech.

     Not only is that happening, but some of these activists are even trashing restaurants and intimidating employees.  I guess this inconsideration toward these poor people isn’t unsurprising.  I hate listening to people bitch about how Chik Fil-A is closed on Sundays.  Heaven forbid some overworked and underpaid member of the service industry gets one day off when you want your damn chicken fix. 

     What makes me even angrier is when you consider similar past events and observe the hypocrisy of these people.  Remember about a year ago when the Susan G. Komen for the Cure announced that it was no longer going to fund Planned Parenthood, and many liberals threw a tantrum?  A bipartisan charity group decided that it was no longer going to support a divisive cause.  After all, wouldn’t it be unethical to give money to a foundation your donors may be reluctant to support, and wouldn’t it compromise your stated mission?  The Komen group made a logical ethical choice, and these leftists boycotted them, demonstrating that they apparently cared more about abortion than curing a deadly disease.  I hate how some people have to have their cake and eat it too.  Yeah, it’s not enough for them that a group doesn’t oppose their cause; they have to support it.  Funny how these people would boycott a chicken company for taking a side on an issue when they boycotted another entity for doing the exact fucking opposite.  

     Let’s not forget that time when a lot of people got offended by this yummy looking Oreo.  Predictably, those people were mocked for boycotting a food product that disagreed with them….by people who are now boycotting a food product for disagreeing with them.  I love how liberals think that the rules they set for the other side don’t apply to them.  Sure, you might say, “But it’s different because WE’RE  THE GOOD GUYS.”  Well, yeah, that’s what every hypocrite thinks.

Ironically, I’m actually not that big a fan of Chik Fil-A.  It’s ok, but I never understood the fascination for it and I never thought it was anything special.  Personally, I always preferred Zaxby’s sublime buffalo chicken tenders.  I’m probably not going to go out of my way patronize Chik Fil-A, but I won’t boycott it.  I may sympathize with liberals in the war over gay rights, but this is a battle they do not deserve to win.