2012 Films Ive Seen Ranked from Best to Worst

1. Dark Knight Rises-I had the reaction to it that many people had with Nolan's first two films: profound, definitive for the superhero genre, a story with great dramatic weight, add whatever other superlatives you want. I felt Batman Begins had too much exposition and Dark Knight was too focused on making its villain as grotesque as possible while Dark Knight Rises was primarily about its story.
2. Argo-Not much to say here that hasn't already been said. It's a very solid film that evoked a similar feeling of greatness as the Flight and Dark Knight Rises. It felt slightly less profound than Dark Knight Rises and slightly more broad than Flight.
3. Flight-One great crash scene, a great use of Denzel Washington's star power, and a great balancing out of two or three different story lines that draw from the best of different genres (i.e. disaster films, courtroom films, films with alcoholic characters).
4. Silver Linings Playbook-There were a few moments that didn't work emotionally (Robert DeNiro trying to be sappy comes to mind) that could easily have been discarded, but much of the film worked and the acting by the leads was phenomenal. The film was brave in showing characters who were really mentally ill.
5. Les Miserables-A grand spectacle but didn't have as coherent of a narrative as the top four entries. Hugh Jackman was a big highlight
6. Prometheus-A pretty squicky (read: nausea-inducing) film but one with an immensely imaginative vision and completely immersive narrative. It was also a film that can be described as highly intellectual.
7. Hyde Park on Hudson-Dare I say better than the Kings Speech? Its a quieter film but had quite a bit to say about politics and the illusions of power between all the subtleties. Plus, I've never seen a film that made polyamory seem so wholesomely American.
8. Wreck it Ralph-A film that's a lot of fun for anyone who grew up in the age of Nintendo. The film feels like it takes you deep into a wondrous world because it worked out its infrastructure and plot holes well. Great casting choices and chemistry between the characters.
9. Best Exotic Marigold Hotel-Slightly less memorable than on first viewing, I felt the Altmanesque story structure worked which is a hard task to pull off. Stories like this are often disjointed. The film nicely gave some of its characters a happy ending while leaving others hanging but apologetically gave the Dev Patel character a magical happy ending that felt a little Bollywood to me.
10. Robot and Frank-Not all films about the dangers of robots have to be dystopian sci-fi films. This one feels more like the kind of broody character piece you'd see at Sundance and that's a refreshing twist on the genre. Frank Langella is wonderful and Susan Sarandon shows she should be in more supporting parts. The hipster in charge of revamping the library makes for a great villain. Might have ranked higher if a better actor was cast in place of James Marsden
11. Quartet-Billy Connelly's character doesn't exactly fit but Maggie Smith, Pauline Collins, Sheridan Smith and Tom Courtenay are all terrific. The film can be a bit schmaltzy and sensationalistic but the overall sentiment and its anti-ageist credo are not lost. It's a film that takes us into another fascinating world but not all corners of that world are properly fleshed out.
12. Pirates Band of Misfits-This animated entry had the sort of fun spirit and inventiveness that work well for this genre. With Queen Victoria, the archetypal 19th century pirate, and Charles Darwin all fair play for reimagining (I don't think Queen Victoria was a supreme martial artist though I might be mistaken), there was a playful sense of fun in these historical archetypes. Good pacing as well.
13. Zero Dark Thirty-Less exciting than 80% of the episodes of Homeland. That's the consequence of the Golden Age of TV for you. The final scenes of the raid and the closing shot of Maya's short-lived catharsis before looking to the next challenge were highlights.
14. Pitch Perfect-Anna Kendrick probably shouldn't have done a film like this but she did and elevated the material significantly (and she now has a single that's topping the itunes charts). It successfully immerses the viewer into an interesting subculture, is written with a great sprinkling of humor (a 30 Rock writer penned the script), has great music and a pretty good collection of cast members.
15. Dictator-A great comedic effort on par with Baron Cohen's other comedic works that was still risky without the unpleasant byproduct of knowing that innocent people (who gave up their privacy by signing a misleading waiver) were hurt. I think it says more about our society's voyeuristic tastes that the film didn't come close to the general buzz of Baron Cohen's other efforts.
16. Compliance-Haunting and effective. A little sparser and less cinematic than it should've been. In other words, would it not have made a better play?
17. Paperboy-I read the book and saw the film and thought some good and bad choices were made Director Lee Daniels. At the end of the day, it was an interesting story and its a credit to the acting that these seemingly baffling choices weren't godawful. Nicole Kidman was the biggest snub of the year. 
18. Casa de mi Padre-A noble experiment that had its moments. Didn't take full comedic advantage of its premise leading to the humor not resonating 100% but Ferrell and crew went all out on replicating the world they were parodying.
19. Safety Not Guaranteed-A winningly clever film knocked down a couple pegs by two elements that rubbed me the wrong way: The unnecessary and implausible romantic pairing of two characters and the painting of Jake Johnson's character as more of a jerk than Johnson projects. Other than that, much to like about the film as an inventive indie film.
20. Beasts of the Southern Wild-Yes it's highly imaginative but kind of slow and the dad character is awfully hard to like. I ultimately did come around to appreciating Dwight Henry's character as a tough-love dad and applaud the performance but why did the film make it so hard. 
21. The Master-The film had some great performances and a few scenes that resonates but did the film really have anything important to say? It rode high in critical appreciation on the backs of Paul Thomas Anderson and the love for Phil Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams so I know I'm in the minority but I'm struck more by the anticlimactic ending.
22. Men in Black 3-Looking back, I don't think I've ever been in love with the Men in Black franchise. I've watched all three simply because of a fondness for Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith. The second installment was the one that had the best flow and comic rhythm. This one had a few more bumps and an immensely complex plot (for a series that's not supposed to take itself seriously) but was still enjoyable nonetheless.
24. Trouble with the Curve-It's an adequate popcorn film that alternates between moments that are slightly cheesy and high notes that are genuinely earned. Timberlake gives the first performance I can genuinely see him as an actor in, Amy Adams is great as always although Clint Eastwood's performance seems like a Gran Torino imitation. The main reason it's ranked so low is that the entire premise is just dumb: A man who looks well past retirement age and losing his sight is protesting retirement?
23. Hunger Games-Gary Ross is a great director, but I don't think he gave the film that much of an auteur stamp. It was pretty simply a by-the-numbers adaptation with a few small upgrades: The map room and the fireballs were both pretty impressive, for example. Still, even megastar casting moves like Jennifer Lawrence, Lenny Kravitz, and whatever semi-random hunk of the year they get to play the love interest isn't enough incentive to advise someone to just read the book instead.
25. Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter-Wasn't a disappointment in relation to my expectations. The special effects were pretty up there (even when compared to your average $200 million dollar budget film) and the performances of the supporting actors (Anthony Mackie, Jimmi Simpson, Alan Tyduk) were strong (although those three rarely disappoint). 
26. Bernie-It wasn't necessarily a flawed film and it stayed faithful to the story it was based on. I would simply argue that neither the story nor the lead character (though quite endearing) were never that interesting. In addition, it's a film heavy on a sense of place and I never quite fell in love with Carthage, Texas.
27. The Impossible-On the upside, the film set likely beat Titanic out for most gallons of water taken from the public reservoir for use on a movie set. We can also point to Naomi Watts' Oscar nomination but she is pretty much Oscar-worthy in everything she does. For a film that was about arguably the biggest natural disaster of my lifetime, I found it surprising that the film was devoid of any interpersonal conflict nor did I find very much of an intriguing man vs. the elements through-line like Cast Away or Alive.
28. Seven Psychopaths-A Martin McDonagh shoot-em-up film with a gimmick that I don't even think Martin McDonagh took very seriously. It had some nice moments but I don't think it came off as much of a clever twist of the genre as it meant to be. The end result was less entertaining than a straight-up version of the genre that had a better sense of what it was.
29. Madagascar 3-I enjoyed the first two for their clever humor and interplay between the well-developed characters but this one seemed haphazard and even illogical (a tiger fitting inside a wedding ring? the quartet of zoo animals swimming to Europe from Africa?) by the standards of a cartoon. The set pieces (particularly Monte Carlo) were uneven, the additional characters took away from the interplay of the original quartet, the villainous zookeeper was treated kind of ridiculously and the film felt rushed.
30. Struck by Lightning-Chris Coffer has veered away from his flamboyant diva character on "Glee" (although he admittedly got more likable in later seasons) to an ungrateful brat. How is this considered a good career move? The film lacked enough of a positive pole to counterbalance it's depressing aura. I believe Chris Coffer is talented but it wasn't the right vehicle for him, even if he wrote it.
31. Ted-I was hoping for Seth McFarlane to make a great transition to movies and I'm happy others liked it but I found the film highly disappointing, juvenile and somewhat of a cop out at the end. Mark Wahlberg still gets massive points for bravery with this role.

If Movies 2012 were like March Madness

Here would be my estimation of the seeds:

1 Silver Linings Playbook, Argo, Lincoln, Zero Dark Thirty
2 Les Miserables, Django Unchained, Amour, Life of Pi
3 Skyfall, Avengers, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Master
4 Moonrise Kingdom, Dark Knight Rises, Flight, Magic Mike
5 Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, Hobbit, Looper, The Impossible
6 Quartet, Prometheus, Frankenweenie, The Promised Land
7 Ted, Wreck-it-Ralph, Rust and Bone, Sessions
8 Hunger Games, Hyde Park on Hudson, Cloud Atlas, Perks of Being a Wallflower
9 Bourne Legacy, Bernie, Amazing Spiderman, Brave
10 Arbitage, Lawless, Anna Karennia, This is 40
11 Deep Blue Sea, Chronicle, Seven Psychopaths, Royal Affair
12 The Dictator, Twilight 4, Pitch Perfect, Paperboy
13 Safety Not Guaranteed, Trouble with the Curve, Celeste and Jesse Forever, Casa de mi Padre
14 The Campaign, Your Sister's Sister, Rock of Ages, Savages
15 To Rome with Love, 21 Jump Street, Three Stooges, Ginger and Rosa
16 Battleship, Dredd, Parental Guidance, Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter
Let me know your opinions on placement

The Paperboy: The Book vs. The Movie

I'm thrilled to say that on a recent vacation to Florida I read a book. It wasn't assigned to me by an English teacher, I didn't do it to maintain my status in a book club, I didn't see the movie first, and it wasn't a really hook-laden thriller, comedy book, or hot cultural buzz item of the moment (ie Hunger Games, Da Vinci code both of which I read).
The book was The Paperboy which recently was released as a film under the screenplay and direction of Lee Daniels (Precious) and having seen both I'll discuss the differences BEWARE: SPOILERS AHEAD:

1. Jack is emotionally catatonic in the book-Jack is never particularly outward with his emotions as the narrator. His highs aren't particularly high and his lows aren't particularly low. Having just been expelled from college, he's somewhat numb: Thoughts of returning to college don't interest him, he's somewhat blank to what he wants to do in life; aside from an abstract attraction to Charlotte, he's not particularly interested in sex and socializing; and aside from his brother and a passing hint of attachment to his dad and housekeeper, he's fairly uninterested in people.

In the movie, any actor with a working pulse would be livelier than the description of Jack in the book. Enter smiley, bubbly Zac Efron from High School Musical and Jack's depression suddenly seems a lot less acute.
Verdict: The movie. It's probably too much to expect Zac Efron to go full Jennifer Anniston in "The Good Girl" and I am not sure that I would've wanted him to either. The story was about a kid who was lost in the world but it wasn't really about a kid who was entirely emotionless.
It was nice to see Jack smile in moderation.

2. In the book, Jack doesn't necessarily have sex with Charlotte, Jack doesn't confront Charlotte over Yardley, and Charlotte doesn't directly discuss with Jack her having sex with him-
In the book, Jack is so distraught after Ward's beating that Charlotte rocks her and "holds him in her arms" all night or something like that. It's kind of vague but more to the point, Jack doesn't run around the next morning feeling like a changed man because he got lucky the night before with the woman he's been longing for. His thoughts are mostly with his brother and everything else seems like a blur. In the book, Jack is sexually awakened by Charlotte but longs for her in an abstract sense. He is more distraught by the idea of the wrong man having her instead (i.e. Hillary van Wetter, Yardley) and is too shy or disinterested to confront Charlotte directly about her dalliance with Yardley. In the book as in the movie, Charlotte tells Jack that he needs to get laid. In the book, however, Charlotte and Jack never approach the topic over whether she'd be the one he should get laid with.

Verdict: On all three counts, the book.  The did-they-or- didn't-they dynamic would have given viewers something to talk about and better reflects the rich emotional space of Jack's head. Getting the girl of his dreams and it barely registering with him is an effective way to illustrate just how devastated he was with Ward's beating. It's also better that Jack did not have either of those conversations directly with Charlotte. Addition by subtraction.

3. Charlotte pees on Jack-This wouldn't be a major deal except for the fact that this film is now known as "the one where Nicole Kidman pees on Zac Efron" and speculation over whether the scene was real (answer: yes, Nicole Kidman is a method actress even when its gross) dominates discussion of the film. In the book, it's some nursing students who save Ward's life. In the film, the fact that they are nursing students, who first try some non-peeing methods of recovery on Jack, is omitted.
Verdict-Score one for the movie-It would have been helpful to know that the girls who initiate the peeing incident are nursing students because otherwise that gives the impression that everyone knows that peeing is the cure for jelleyfish stings. On the whole, however, it is an improvement because Jack and Charlotte were subconsciously really wanting to exchange some bodily fluids with each other anyways.

4. The entrance of Ellen Guthrie in the story-In the movie, Ellen Guthrie is Jack's father's ladyfriend and subordinate and eventually becomes his wife and co-editor of the newspaper. There's not really much more to it then that in the film.
In the book, Ellen Guthrie is someone who is much more of a character. She enters the story when there's a party being thrown on Ward's behalf at the household and Jack meets her outside the household as she's drinking and she's dressed procotavely enough get Jack a little sweaty. Like Charlotte, she temps his sexually-inexperienced confusion by telling him that if he were four years younger, he would be an ideal bedmate for her. Jack briefly ponders the act of bedding Ellen, and then an Oedipeal nightmare occurs: the sexually charged Ellen winds up sleeping with dad that night. Ellen then calls Jack to apologize for being a tease and invites him to her apartment, Jack seems to alternate between being disinterested and confused, and next thing you know the opportunity is lost and Ellen goes from being potential sex partner to new mommy.
Verdict-What the hell was Lee Daniels thinking? Book scores a billion points here. This love triangle between Ellen,

5. The Death of Ward-In the book, Ward (somewhat of a perfectionist) falls into despondency upon realizing his error that won him a Pulitzer led to Charlotte's death. He goes to California and drowns himself in the ocean. Although there's some wiggle room, it's treated by Jack as a suicide.
The Verdict-Slight edge to the book. If I was a purist, I might say the book is better or that the film is massively unfaithful. Then again, how do you have a filmically satisfying resolution to the brother flying off to California and possibly or possibly not drowning himself. Also, Van Wetter did kill ward in a metaphorical sense by exposing his flaw as a reporter, so this is close to an acceptable shortcut. Still, the site of Zac Efron caring two dead bodies is a little heavy of an ending and I think a distraught Matthew M. (Who's acting stock has gone up as of late) could have given a good scene expressing that dismay before he went off into the ocean.

6. Yardley got the job through unorthodox means-In the movie, there's a throwaway line where Yardley directly tells Jack that he got his position as Jack's partner through
performing oral sex on him. In the book, Yardley and Ward are an odd couple. Yardley is less of a perfectionist and is more concerned about the big picture. This figures into the plot because Ward trusted the key piece of evidence to Yardley and knew deep inside that Yardley would be too lazy to pursue the evidence.
Verdict: Oh god, Lee Daniels, TMI, the book. But in all seriousness, learning more about Yardley than how he compares to Ward and Jack is detrimental to the story. This isn't Yardley's story but the story of two brothers and a story about the write-up to a murder investigation. Which brings us to the biggest change of all....

7. Yardley is Black-In the book, he's known for being a smooth lothario. In the movie, he is known for being "the black guy."
Verdict: The book. Yardley wasn't a broken character that needed fixing. He was clearly meant to be a doppelganger for the two brothers. He's a sexual rival to Jack (in that he likes Charlotte and does something about it). He's also a lazier and less thorough version of Jack. Bringing in race politics (especially amplified from 1965) distracts from Yardley's commonalities with the two brothers.

8. Anita, the housekeeper, is the narrator in the movie-In the movie, Jack is the narrator. The director, Lee Daniels, is a prominent voice in the African-American filmic community and said he felt a need to respond to The Help and so wanted to elaborate on Anita. That is also why he wanted to make Yardley black.
Verdict-From a filmic standpoint, the book wins here too. Except for a few lines in text that show Jack has a clear attachment to Anita, The Paperboy is not thematically synonymous with The Help in any way, shape, or form. It was a big stretch. This was Jack's story. How do we even explain Anita having a good sense of detail for the crime scenes? She wasn't present at 90% of the scenes in the movie.