Swiped (2025)
And expected in the future, in some cases without release dates:
Ripped
Tangled (live action) (2028)
I only actually attended two of these screenings, when I saw Lolita in 2005 (Kubrick version) and The Philadelphia Story in 2006. The movies they show nowadays are more mid and populist -- it would be almost impossible that they would screen a movie I hadn't already seen. That's in keeping with today's movie trends and it's something I might like to write about at length sometime, but I haven't yet reached critical mass on that.
Today I'm writing about the fact that they send out emails that warn of a LOW TICKET ALERT, which I actually think is a pretty useful feature. Surely they are not the only organization that does this, but this is where I've noticed it. It helps get your butt in gear to pull the trigger on completing a ticket purchase that you might have already completed if you weren't waffling or procrastinating.
And this is something I needed for the performance of Frozen Jr. at my kids' school.
If you know me, you know that I don't particularly care for Frozen. Now I'm talking about the Disney movie here, not the movie where skiers are trapped on a ski lift with hungry wolves below. Though a musical version of that could be interesting.
My "dislike," which is too strong a word, for Frozen has to do with my undying love for what I consider to be its chief rival, Tangled. Unfortunately, in that case, probably only Tangled-heads like me consider it a rivalry. It's like if you have a really good sports team and a really bad sports team that have a geographical proximity that would cause you to consider them rivals. Only the really bad sports team thinks of it as a rivalry. The good team probably only thinks of the bad team on the day that they play them.
I'm getting sidetracked.
If you know me, you also know that I love musical theater. I don't talk about it often on here, so I guess you would have to really know me, maybe IRL. In any case, I did it throughout my childhood and on into college, appearing in no less than a dozen musicals all told.
When we used to live next door to a school at our old place in North Melbourne, I took my older son, who was then probably about six or seven, to see their staging of The Wizard of Oz. It was an all girls school, so that was sort of funny -- like the opposite of the old Shakespearean days, when all the parts were played by men. The production itself was a bit chintzy too. But I was very glad to go, to support the school and to nourish that live theater part of me that doesn't get nourished as often as I would like.
It's something I'd like my kids to do, but they have no interest. That's fine. But failing that, I want to see it at least available an option, as it was in the U.S. throughout the 1980s and presumably into today, and as I know it is at private schools here in Australia.
Public schools, like the ones my kids attend? Not so much.
Enter Frozen Jr.
I haven't been aware of many, if any, musicals at this school, which my older son has been attending for four years, and which my younger son just started attending this year. I was so thirsty to see a musical at this school that I would have gone, no matter what it was.
So I was set to go to Frozen Jr. Even if my family didn't want to go. And even if I would have preferred Tangled Jr.
But I didn't act quickly enough. The last email I got from the school on this subject read "Frozen Jr. - SOLD OUT."
Darn.
I don't know why I hesitated. Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that I was the only person in my family who wanted to go. I felt a little bit weird, in advance, about being a 50-something year old man going by himself to such a show. Even though it's a school musical and 95% of the audience is parents, including presumably a number of single dads.
Another source of hesitation? This school has kids from prep (the equivalent of kindergarten) all the way to year 12. I suspect the Frozen Jr. cast is comprised mostly of the youngest kids at the school, making it not very closely resemble the sort of high school musical experience I was hoping for.
I would have gone anyway.
But I really have only myself to blame. And really, I already sort of got my LOW TICKET ALERT.
The previous email I got about Frozen Jr. had the subject "Frozen Jr: Extra Tickets Release," and contained the following:
Due to overwhelming demand, more seats have been released for the Thursday Performance on August 13th.
There are still seats available for Wednesday night as well.
I think the thing here was that I felt like I was calling a bluff. Like this was a false LOW TICKET ALERT. You have to release new tickets, but you still have tickets for the first show? It sounds like maybe you haven't actually sold that many tickets to either of the shows, and this is just a desperate ploy to goose sales.
Nope. Six days later they were gone.
Ah well.
At least the existence of Frozen Jr. suggests the school is actually involved in this sort of activity. It's seemed to me like musical theater is, generally speaking, a far less popular activity in Australia, either due to lesser resources (most schools don't even have their own sports teams, as that is handled at a community level), or to the change to the current generation, in which musical theater is naturally less interesting to kids.
Next time, I won't wait for a LOW TICKET ALERT.
And maybe next time, it'll be Oklahoma! or Anything Goes or The Music Man.
(Yes, apparently I am only interested in stagings of shows I was actualy in.)
Well, I only sort of like Moana. So a third Moana movie in ten years seems like a lot, especially when Disney has other franchises you would expect them to nurture.
The original Moana came out in 2016. Hard to believe but that is ten years ago now. I liked this movie but did not love it. 3.5 stars.
Possibly because Disney was nurturing its other franchises, it took until 2024 for Moana 2 to come out. I thought this movie was meh as hell. I barely remember what happens in it. I think there might have been coconuts and a chicken.
Now only two years later, we're getting the de rigeur live action Moana. It's too soon, I think.
Now I should say, the ordinary "sequel every two years" rhythm of many popular franchises could give you way more than three movies within a ten-year span. In fact, depending on how popular it was, you could get as many as five. In fact, there are some series where they basically make one movie a year until the box office no longer supports that pace. I'm looking at you, Saw.
For animated movies, though, the timeframe gets distended. Even if you determine the first movie was a hit and you want to make a second, you're starting all the way over at the beginning again, even if you've already gotten some of the technology assets lined up to easily create these characters again. We probably would have seen Moana 2 a lot earlier than eight years after Moana if you could churn out animated movies any more quickly.
So I really think it's the close proximity of Moana 2 and the live-action Moana that seems like testing our Moana-related good will. I'm so not ready for another Moana, this soon, that I might not even see this one.
I think it seems particularly strange when you look at Disney's other franchises, particularly its most popular one.
There isn't even a live-action Frozen in the works yet. I find that odd. Granted, they're making an animated Frozen III that will be coming out next year. But that'll be eight years since Frozen II, which seems like a long time without giving us anything from this franchise. (Though it does mirror the previous gaps in this and other franchises, and is exactly the same gap as the one just discussed between Moana and Moana II.)
They are, however, making a live-action Tangled, news that I greet with both excitement and trepidation. As possibly my favorite non-Pixar Disney movie of all time, at least that's what my Flickchart says, Tangled is both the sort of thing I really want to see in live-action form, to see how they handle it, and don't want to see in live-action form, for fear of how they'll ruin it. However, it does have the benefit of being directed by Michael Gracey, who made sort of wondrous things happen in Better Man a few years ago, so maybe there's some chance for the gravity-defying elements of Tangled to really make it onto the screen here.
But that movie doesn't even have a release year yet on IMDB. Which means it might be almost 20 years since the 2010 release of the original that they've nurtured that "franchise," if you can even call it a franchise without there ever having been an animated sequel.
Compared to these two, indeed, three Moanas in ten years feels like a lot.
And I can feel it in my own sluggish response to the possibility of seeing the film. Even the prospect of seeing Dwayne Johnson actually play Maui, rather than just voicing him, doesn't really move the needle for me.
I should say that almost none of the Disney live-action remakes have really done it for me. If you forced me to try to figure out which one was the most successful, I don't even know that I'd have a ready answer. Maybe Maleficent? Almost all have been various levels of disappointing.
But at least in the case of the others, I hadn't just had my fill of them with a decade of regular exposure.
The second time you see a movie, it's either an endorsement of the first viewing, or an attempt to see what you missed on the first viewing.
The third time you see a movie, this is probably a movie you really like, maybe even love -- or you could still be feeling around with it, making one more attempt to see what you missed on the first and second viewings.
The fourth time you see a movie? Well, that's the moment it becomes yours. You've stopped trying to make films happen that aren't going to happen. That's the confirmation that it is in your regular rotation, and you probably plan to see it every five years until you die.
I saw Gapsar Noe's Climax last night for the fourth time, and if you read to the end of this post, you will get a massive spoiler section on why I watched it last night. But there's plenty of good content before then, so don't turn away too early.
It's the fourth time in less than eight years, which means yeah, I pretty much love this movie. My first viewing was in August of 2018, and then I watched it again in 2019 (to consider it as part of my best of the decade, though it didn't make the cut) and 2021 (just for fun, or "fun," because there are parts of this movie that are an endurance test). In fact, I watched this movie so frequently early in its existence that you could say my fourth viewing broke something of a Climax drought, as it took another four-and-a-half years -- a lot closer to that "every five years" timeframe I mentioned a moment ago.
This is only a way in to what I really want to talk about today.
When I rewatch a movie, I add it to a Letterboxd list I have. I should say, I add it only if it's not already on the list. If it is already on the list, I change the order so it appears at the top, as the most recent. In the notes, I list the other dates I've rewatched this movie, as well as the original date I watched it, if it's available.
This has grown out of a list I keep in a Microsoft Word document, and that list turns 20 this year.
That's right, it was the year 2006 when I decided I should keep track of when I rewatched movies. The first rewatch I ever recorded was in June of 2006, when I saw it fit to make note of the fact that I had rewatched Ghostbusters. I can't tell you the exact day in June of 2006 that I rewatched Ghostbusters, because for the first year-and-a-half I was doing this, I just listed the month and the year. But then with my Christmas 2007 viewing of The Empire Strikes Back, I started adding the exact date and have been doing so ever since.
What this 20-year period does is it allows me to have an exact viewing count of certain favorite movies -- exact for the ones that have come into existence since 2006 or that I've watched for the first time since 2006, I should say. For others, it is only a "confirmed viewing count."
This is what I'm looking at today.
Now, this post is going to give no love to some of my favorite movies of all time. In fact, it's going to give no love to four of my top five movies on Flickchart, and most of my top ten. Let's stick with four of those top five so we don't get too bogged down on this point. Back to the Future (#2), Pulp Fiction (#3), Raiders of the Lost Ark (#4) and Citizen Kane (#5) are all, obviously, movies I love dearly and have seen many times. However, I happen to have seen each of them only a couple times in the past 20 years, for different reasons in each case, that I don't need to get into right now. For these movies, I have a fairly low "confirmed viewing count."
The extreme example of this is probably National Lampoon's Animal House, which might be the movie I've seen the most simply because we watched it about once a week in my freshman year of college, though perhaps I came in and out on some of those and it may not have been a complete start-to-finish viewing each time. Since 2006? Just a single viewing on February 6, 2009. Probably worth a revisit.
So what I'm looking at today are movies where I can confirm at least four viewings. That means I've rewatched them at least three times in the past 20 years.
And I think it won't surprise you to know that there are a lot of these -- so many in the case of four viewings that I will just give a big list without delving in any further on them.
The ones higher than that will get a little more time, because they truly rise to a special level.
Before I give you the info, I want to start out saying I am embarrassed to confess that only a single film from before I was born appears here , and it was only a few months before I was born. While that is disappointing in some respects, it does reflect a genuine preference in me as a cinephile for films that came out when I was capable of seeing them in the theater for the first time. At the very least I am more likely to revisit those films. I'm not going to analyze that tendency today, just report it as fact.
There's one other little detail I'd like to make you aware of. I started recording inital watches in 2002, and there are a number of movies I saw for the first time after 2002 that I definitely rewatched in those four years before I started recording my rewatches in 2006. Some of those have also gotten a +1 on their confirmed viewing count because I know the post-2006 rewatches were not my first rewatches of those movies. However, I have given them only one additional confirmed viewing, not multiple like some of them may deserve.
Let's go in reverse order, with the highest first. There are some lists where it's worth working your way up to the highest, but I don't think this is one of them.
9 confirmed viewings
Films: Tangled (2010, Nathan Greno & Byron Howard)
Comment: Everyone who reads this blog knows how much I love Tangled. In fact, this is the 15th time Tangled is getting tagged on my blog, if we are talking accumulated stats. That's nine viewings in just more than 15 years, so I see it more often than every two years. The first five of those were in the first five years of its existence, and I've pumped the brakes a bit in the past ten years. In fact, after last year's ninth viewing disappointed me just a little bit, I am vowing to take a bit of a Tangled break, so I don't know how soon it will get to double digits. However, coincidentally, I only just yesterday was talking about it because I learned of the first casting news regarding the live action version of the movie, with two actors I didn't know in the lead roles and Kathryn Hahn as Mother Gothel. I think this is barely in preproduction, so at this point it doesn't seem likely we'd see it any sooner than 2028. So maybe that'll be a good time to finally make Tangled my first movie to reach a confirmed double digits in viewings.
8 confirmed viewings
Films: None!
Comment: We can skip right over this one. Just another indication of how Tangled has dominated my affections during these two decades.
7 confirmed viewings
Films: Children of Men (2006, Alfonso Cuaron), Galaxy Quest (1999, Dean Parisot), Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006, Tom Tykwer)
Comment: I have to tell you that I am cheating just a little bit with this viewing count for Galaxy Quest, for reasons I cannot entirely explain, though I'll try. I've only rewatched Galaxy Quest five times during this 20-year span, which should mean, by the rules I've laid out, that I can only confirm six viewings. Except a memorable feature of my initial Galaxy Quest viewing back in 1999 was that I saw it in the theater on two consecutive nights, that's just how much I loved it. Because this second viewing in 1999 functions effectively as a confirmed viewing, and doesn't require any fuzzy logic like "I'm sure I've seen this three or more other times in the intervening years," I'm going to give it a seventh confirmed viewing. I've probably seen it two other times, in reality, which would equal Tangled, but then would be behind others with a bunch of unconfirmed viewings, which I've already mentioned.
The two 2006 films finished in my top ten of that decade, with COM all the way up at #2, and they are films I look forward to revisiting as often as I can. Interestingly, both could be higher but the last time I watched either of them was when I watched Children in February of 2022. I last watched Perfume in 2020.
6 confirmed viewings
Films: Adaptation (2002, Spike Jonze), The Cell (2000, Tarsem Singh), Donnie Darko (2001, Richard Kelly), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004, Michel Gondry), Raising Arizona (1987, Joel Coen), Spring Breakers (2013, Harmony Korine), Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015, J.J. Abrams), Step Brothers (2008, Adam McKay), Vanilla Sky (2001, Cameron Crowe)
Comment: Donnie Darko is worth singling out here because it's one of the ones I mentioned earlier, which got credit for a single unknown rewatch in the years between when I first saw it (early 2003) to when I started recording rewatches in 2006. I may have actually watched Darko as many as three times during these three years, since I was pretty obsessed with it in those first years after watching it, ultimately still fond enough of it seven years later to name it my #1 of the decade. Subsequent viewings have been fewer, but I still do catch up with it every four or five years.
Raising Arizona is, of course, my #1 on Flickchart, but I specifically draw out viewings of this to about every four years just so I can savor it on each viewing and never get tired of it. (See: Tangled.) The only other one from this group that I'll spend an additional comment on is Spring Breakers, which was on a viewing pace similar to Tangled in the first x number of years after it came into existence. But after watching it as the final movie I was vetting for my best of the 2010s -- it came in second to Tangled for the entire decade -- I haven't seen it again since. That was December 30, 2019. I haven't lost any love for Spring Breakers, it's just not come up again for an organic viewing since then -- but that indicates how much higher it could be if I'd kept up anything like my original pace.
5 confirmed viewings
Films: Elf (2003, Jon Favreau), Fantastic Planet (1973, Rene Laloux), First Reformed (2018, Paul Schrader), Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008, Nicholas Stoller), Henry Poole is Here (2008, Mark Pellington), Inside Out (2015, Pete Docter), Kissing Jessica Stein (2002, Charles Herman-Wurmfeld), Lost in Translation (2003, Sofia Coppola), Major League (1989, David S. Ward), Moon (2009, Duncan Jones), mother! (2017, Darren Aronofsky), Ruby Sparks (2012, Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris), Run Lola Run (1998, Tom Tykwer) This is Spinal Tap (1984, Rob Reiner), Titanic (1997, James Cameron)
Comment: Getting a lot more titles now, unsurprisingly. This is Spinal Tap just made it into this group a few weeks ago, though of course there are lots of repeat viewings of this top ten movie on Flickchart littered throughout the pre-2006 days. First Reformed and mother! are notable for getting to five viewings in only a brief nine years of existence -- even though I listed the release year of First Reformed as 2018, it's usually listed as 2017 because that's when it appeared at festivals. It was my #1 in 2018. (I'm hugely inconsistent on how I handle this, for some reason. Run Lola Run, which also appears here and is in my top 20 on Flickchart along with being what I anointed my #1 out of all my movies that I've ranked #1 for a given year, was actually my #1 of 1999, but I've listed its 1998 German release year here. Who can understand how my brain works, though I think the distinction is between whether it's a foreign film or a domestic film.) Henry Poole is probably the most surprising inclusion here, as I loved this movie enough that I overloaded on viewings of it soon after I first saw it -- though have not now seen it in ten years.
4 confirmed viewings
Films: Agora (2009, Alejandro Amenabar), Beyond the Hills (2012, Cristian Mungiu), Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu), Bound (1996, Lana & Lily Watchowski), The Cable Guy (1996, Ben Stiller), Climax (2018, Gaspar Noe), Creed (2015, Ryan Coogler), The Empire Strikes Back (1980, Irvin Kershner), Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994, Mike Newell), A Ghost Story (2017, David Lowery), The Guru (2003, Daisy von Scherler Mayer), Idiocracy (2006, Mike Judge), Inside Llewyn Davis (2013, Joel & Ethan Coen), The Iron Giant (1999, Brad Bird), Monty Pyton and the Holy Grail (1975, Terry Gilliam & Terry Jones), 127 Hours (2010, Danny Boyle), Parasite (2019, Bong Joon-ho), A Separation (2011, Asgar Farhadi), Sideways (2004, Alexander Payne), The Skeleton Twins (2014, Craig Johnson), The Social Network (2010, David Fincher), Starship Troopers (1997, Paul Verhoeven), The Story of Us (2010, Rob Reiner), Tanna (2015, Martin Butler & Bentley Dean), There Will Be Blood (2007, Paul Thomas Anderson), Time Bandits (1981, Terry Gilliam), Under the Skin (2014, Jonathan Glazer), Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (2007, Jake Kasdan), War of the Worlds (2005, Steven Spielberg), Watchmen (2009, Zack Snyder), What We Do in the Shadows (2014, Taika Waititi)
Comment: Was it even worth listing all those out? Well, I've just done so, no taking it back now.
I'm a little self-conscious about having done this exercise, because part of me is worried that knowing the number of times I've watched a movie -- bringing it to the forefront of my thoughts, as an exercise like this does -- makes me less likely to commit further rewatches on a purely organic basis. Like "Wow I can't believe it's been seven years since I watched Spring Breakers, I really need to change that." The beauty of not knowing is that the rewatches represent only a true desire to see that movie in that moment you choose to rewatch it. If I'm conscious of the horse race aspect of it, something pure is lost.
But what can I say. I'm a stats guy. I always will be. I'm maybe even more of a stats guy than I am a movie guy, but shhh, don't tell anybody.
Okay, now it's finally time for the SPOILER section I mentioned earlier.
This SPOILER section relates to both Climax and to the other movie I saw yesterday, Sirat, so if you haven't seen either of these movies, DO NOT GO ANY FURTHER.
I'm serious. This is your last warning. Though I'll also give a new heading in case you'd like a more definitive line of demarcation.
The thing that made me rewatch Climax after watching Sirat
So both of these movies can be described as "a movie about dance music where the kid dies."
Look I told you to stop reading.
So in Climax, this big group of professional dancers -- like almost 20 -- are housed together in what I understand is a school, in the middle of a blizzard. They're practicing this incredible number for an upcoming dance competition, and if you think I use the word "incredible" lightly, watch the first ten minutes of Climax and you will see that I do not exaggerate. While none of the dancers offers an exact duplicate of what another offers, they all have an astonishing ability to contort their bodies and to bounce with the beat. Not only is there this great opening, set to "Supernature" by Cerrone, but there's another sequence at about the film's midpoint -- just before things go off the rails -- that captures their dance moves from the God's eye view of directly above where they're dancing.
Then someone spikes the sangria with acid, and everything goes to shit.
This particular post does not require us to delve into all the ways the things go to shit, but they are impressive. It does require us to talk about what happens to the only kid present, who appears to be about six years old -- maybe as young as four -- and is the son of a woman who is not dancing, but was once part of this group.
When she realizes she is unexpectedly high on acid, has never had it before, is super freaked out and does not know the best way to handle it -- and that her son also drank some of the punch -- she takes the little boy and locks him into an electrical closet, so no one can do anything to him and so he can't do anything to himself. (The flaw in the logic of that last assumption is going to soon become tragically clear.) Terrifyingly, we hear his screams to be let out echoing throughout the space, just one of the features of the descent into hell that Climax becomes.
She's told him to stay clear of that box against the wall because it could kill him. So it's not like she's taken no precautions. But she's also lost the key she used to lock him in, and because everything is so chaotic and because there's a saboteur in their midst, it isn't clear whether she's going to find it in order to finally let him out.
At some point a few minutes after we've last checked in with this plot, the electricity shorts out -- and there's only one conclusion of what happened. One of the other dancers -- who, even before they were dosed, were pretty short on empathy -- shouts out "Tito got fried!" And indeed, that's what happened.
Grim.
Though maybe not as grim as what happens in Sirat, which is why it's dividing critics between those who have decided it's among the best of 2025 and those who are decidedly mixed, perhaps even negative, on it.
There are some big surprises in Sirat that I don't need to spoil, but I do need to spoil this one, and you can't say you haven't been warned -- though I did already give it away.
A father and his early teenage son are trying to track down their daughter/sister at a desert rave in Morocco. They don't find her at this rave, nor do they even find anyone who knows her, but given her movements in such circles, they think there's a good chance they may find her at the next scheduled desert rave, closer to the border of Mauritania. Which is going to be difficult to get to, given the terrain.
Against their better judgment, a group of five other ravers across two large vehicles, a bus and a truck, allow the man and the boy to follow them in their small and ancient vehicle that's not cut out for this sort of environment. The man's inadequate vehicle comes into play in what happens to his son, but not in the way they expect.
While the adults are all working to push one of the trucks out of the place that it's been caught in a dip in the road, finally succeeding, the boy -- and his dog, we should point out, who has already had a bad trip himself from eating some human shit containing LSD -- are waiting in their vehicle. For reasons that are not entirely clear except for "shit happens," the vehicle starts to slide backward on the incline. The boy is not old enough to think on his feet and does not pull the handbrake. The car pitches over the side of an embankment and down, down, down, hundreds of rocky and sandy feet below to its ultimate demise, and the demise of the kid and the dog inside.
Grim. Fucking grim.
I think it hits harder in Sirat because the movie is not already set up as a black comedy with a wicked sense of humor, as Climax is. And it's laced with bitter irony because the man is desperately trying to find his daughter, missing five months now, and in the process loses his sweet and earnest younger son as a result of taking imprudent risks. Not to mention the dog.
Both movies are a voyage to hell fueled by drugs and music in their own way, and they made an interesting double feature -- though maybe not to people who love kids and/or dogs. I guess that makes me the sick pervert who doesn't love either?
What changed my mind is that on Friday afternoon, as I was multi-tasking between my third movie (a concert movie, so it was okay) and my personal correspondence, a friend sent me this article from the Onion's AV Club -- the "serious" side of the humor website. (Parody reviews only have a limited usefulness, I suspect.)
The title of that piece had me at hello: "Years before Anna and Elsa, Tangled reinvigorated the Disney princess tradition."
Celebrating the glory of Tangled on its ten-year anniversary and taking a swipe at Frozen? I was putty in the article's hands.
I couldn't line up the dates exactly for ten years, but I got close. I first saw the film on the half-day before Thanksgiving in 2010, which was Wednesday, November 24th. This viewing on Saturday night, in my primetime slot, was on Saturday, November 21st. It hardly seemed worth waiting until Tuesday to make it exactly ten.
In those ten years I've seen Tangled in a variety of different formats. The BluRay I bought soon after it was available had both 2D and 3D versions, and I've watched both -- the 3D version only once, since we had a 3D TV for only less than a year before moving to Australia in 2013. Saturday's viewing was my first on Disney+.
And my love for it just keeps growing.
And yes, I am still discovering things for the first time on this, my seventh viewing. For example, I never before realized the double entendre in Mother Gothel's line to Rapunzel: "Rapunzel, let down your hair! I'm not getting any younger down here." That's just a cliched way of telling someone to hurry up, but in Mother Gothel's case it's literal -- she will be getting younger up there.
Tangled is just chock full of that kind of thing.
But because I've written about that love now a staggering 14 times on this blog -- including just yesterday -- I won't try to produce another Tangled essay today. I guess that's 13 times, actually, since the first post was before I saw it, when I was still skeptical about its possible merits. And that's just the times I actually tagged the movie's title in the post.
Still, I can't go without acknowledging the film's birthday on my blog. I wouldn't miss acknowledging a family member's birthday, and Tangled has, in a weird way, become a bit like family for me. It's maybe my older son's little brother, as he was born almost exactly three months before I first saw the movie.
Here's to another ten years, and another seven viewings in that time ... probably not that many this time, but I mightn't have though I'd watch the movie this many times in my life, let alone in its first decade, so all bets are off.
I thought Frozen II would be a good movie to show what my new projector can really do. I always find that animation looks especially good when projected on a wall, so even if the movie were not good, it'd be a treat for my eyeballs at the very least.
Well, the movie was not good.
Now I should say, I was not a huge fan of the first Frozen. I gave it 3.5 stars out of five, but I now think my feelings toward it are a little closer to a three. And since I often find myself defending the vastly superior Tangled against it, it tends to drive those feelings of comparative dislike, maybe even down to something like 2.5 stars.
Still, I had planned to see the sequel in the theater when it opened last year. I had a good opportunity on the morning I arrived in Tasmania after a ferry ride overnight, when we were going down there for Christmas. I didn't have any other family members with me (my kids were not interested in the movie anyway) and I didn't have anywhere to be until the next day. But I succumbed to the desire to see Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker a second time, rather than Frozen II a first.
Good decision.
This film is a mess. At any given time I did not understand the point of the plot or what its real thrust was supposed to be. The plot, such as it is, screamed of resulting from a bunch of writers sitting in a writing room, knowing they needed to cobble together something credible in this enchanted and ice-encrusted world, because the eight-year-old girls would demand it, but really, having no driving force to tell any particular story themselves.
This narrative slackness is borne out in the songs in particular. Not a single song in this movie is derived from the action. People start singing because they are, mathematically, at a segment of the plot where a song is required. Perhaps the worst example of this, in a character I find incredibly annoying, is when Josh Gad's Olaf sings a song called "When I Am Older." The whole point is that the situation he's in right now -- not that strange in terms of this world, but strange enough for him I guess -- will make more sense to him when he's older. The thing is, he's like the fifth most important character in this film, and he has no agency at all -- everything just happens to him. Why do we care what does or doesn't make sense to him? Oh that's right -- Olaf has to have a song, that's why. Every other song is either an "I'm looking ahead to the great unknown" (that's almost exactly the title of the song) song or a "I'm at my lowest moment" song. How many "lowest moments" can one film have?
Not that these things really matter that much, but I noticed that Elsa's powers can basically be summarized as "whatever the plot requires at the moment." The big climax doesn't even really register because of course she could do what she does -- why not?
I did notice an interesting thing, speaking of Tangled. There were at least two moments that I thought were direct references to that film. There's a little chameleon-like creature in the "enchanted forest" that is basically supposed to serve the same function as Pascal in Tangled, and even looks a lot like him. Then Rider is the name of one of the new characters we meet -- as in Flynn Rider from Tangled. It's almost like this movie's writers themselves realized that Tangled is the better movie, and a better source from which to steal than the original Frozen.
I could certainly go on about my dislike for this movie but I suspect my brunch will be arriving shortly, at which point typing will become much more difficult.
So I'll just close out by saying yes, Frozen II could not even get two stars from me. That's where I thought I would go with it, but by the end I was so annoyed that I busted it down a half-star further to 1.5.
It did look good on the projector though.
25. Portrait of a Lady on Fire (2019, Celine Sciamma) - As I only saw this movie for the first time two weeks ago, it seems miraculous I'd allow it onto my top 25, so #25 is a fitting spot for it, even though that may ultimately be too low. It probably goes without saying that it's also the only film on this list I've seen only once. But once was enough to have Celine Sciamma's film seared into my brain in the most beautiful way possible. It's one of this decade's most involving love stories in one of the decade's most gorgeous settings, and it has a lot to say (quite unobtrusively) about feminism and the relationship between artist and subject. As with a number of films yet to come on this list, it also deals movingly with the melancholy impermanence of things, especially things we love. I can't wait to see it again.
24. BlacKkKlansman (2018, Spike Lee) - BlacKkKlansman has its detractors, but they can shut up. You don't take on as much as Spike Lee takes on here without making a few missteps, but they pale in comparison to what Lee gets right. Lee uses his trademark techniques to give us a version of himself at his very best, from the dolly shots he's been doing since the 1980s, to using humor to deflate tension, to the carnival-esque exaggerations he believes are necessary to make his points. Yet there is also something consummately mature about BKKK, be it Lee's approach to the more realistic scenes or his conspicuous desire to be inclusive -- even the police, some of the greatest enemies of African-Americans of the last decade, get a fair shake here. But just when you think Lee has made a feel-good, Hollywood-ending good time, he punches us between the eyes with the strident reminder that racism is still out there, and as pernicious as ever.
23. Inside Llewyn Davis (2013, Joel & Ethan Coen) - Coming into this year, I considered the Coens' best movie since Fargo and my #3 of 2013 to be a real contender for my top ten of the decade. Unfortunately, you never know which viewing of a beloved movie will underwhelm you slightly, and that was the case with my fourth viewing of Llewyn Davis last month. The previous three were pretty great, though, keeping it barely in my top 25. The Coens revisit the story of Odysseus in a way much more satisfying to me than O Brother Where Art Thou?, as this Oscar Isaac-led odyssey is a masterwork of misanthropy and missed opportunity. Llewyn Davis is not a bad guy, not at his core, but he is blind to what the universe can offer him due to a combination of pride, displacement and mourning. Therefore, he ends up with pretty much nothing. It's beautifully shot by Bruno Delbonnel and poignant in an acerbic way that only the Coens have really mastered.
22. Red State (2011, Kevin Smith) - I didn't think there was much chance that my #2 of 2011 would make this shortlist, given how the cinephile population disrespects its director and mostly fails to consider this movie an exception to his general output. That kind of thing rubs off on you. But when I rewatched Red State this year, I was reminded again why I escalated it to such heights, specifically the performances Smith gets and the innovative camera usage, particularly for him. Religious extremism has rarely been as scary as it is under Michael Parks' Abin Cooper, and I'm still hearing, echoing in my mind, the unnerving way he pronounces the word "godlessness." It's a document full of surprises, both from its narrative and from its director, and it's a vital one.
21. Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu) - I fully expected Birdman backlash to knock my #1 movie of 2014 (and the only best picture winner on this list) out of my top 25. But that's why I rewatched my contenders this year. I kind of fell in love with Birdman all over again on my October rewatch, and it wasn't just the still-jaw-dropping technique. The writing is great here, the acting is great here, and the concept is really great -- an exploration of feelings of mounting irrelevance and failure, tinged with special effects that only make the central gimmick trickier, and also deepen the film's existential themes. Riggan Thomson may be the type of rich white man whose problems are no longer our primary focus in 2020, but that doesn't mean he's not a person. Birdman examines his personhood from every conceivable angle.
20. Toni Erdmann (2016, Maren Ade) - It was probably inevitable that my second viewing of the 162-minute Toni Erdmann, the second longest movie on this list and my #1 of 2016, would not be as great as my first, because the first was one of my two best theater experiences of the decade (along with my #7). But I can't forget the way I/we laughed like gassed up lunatics, in the funniest scene of the decade, and that only two minutes after the end of this scene, probably still suffering the physical after effects of the laughter, I was moved to tears. Maren Ade's film has it all and probably more than that in the affecting story of a professional woman and her kooky dad, who is trying desperately to connect with her by publicly trolling her, wearing a wig and false teeth. They were supposed to make an American remake, but I hope that never happens, because Toni Erdmann is pretty much perfect as is.
19. What Maisie Knew (2013, Scott McGehee & David Siegel) - This may be the most unassuming movie to make my best of the decade, though it does have some competition from a couple titles in my top ten. There's not any special technique to McGehee and Siegel's film nor themes we haven't seen elsewhere, just superlative filmmaking and acting all around, and a story that touches you in the best possible way. Young actress Onata Aprile may actually be the film's special technique as she gives a performance that is both understated yet perfectly emoted, as she's passed around first between her father and her mother, then between the estranged new partners of both parents, who are the real parents of this story. Julianne Moore and Steve Coogan are believably toxic and self-absorbed in their own ways, but the film really belongs to Alexander Skarsgard and Joanna Vaderham, consistently giving a good name to people who just try to do the right thing. What Maisie Knew is one of my favorite right things of the decade.
18. Zootopia (2016, Byron Howard & Rich Moore) - Every time I doubt the potency of Zootopia, I see it again, and I say "Oh yeah, right." I'm not sure how Disney pulled off an animated movie designed for children that is both stupendously entertaining and as politically vital as this; in fact, it is so pointed in its progressive good intentions that you could almost call it strident. But "strident" suggests something that is unpleasant to experience, and Zootopia is the opposite, having something for everyone, even getting through to those who align themselves with the side of the political aisle that supports oppressing minorities and caging immigrants. The metaphor of predators and prey living together happily in a sort of utopia is the type of agenda that brings chills to my spine, but as executed here, also tears to my eyes and laughter to my lungs.
17. 127 Hours (2010, Danny Boyle) - My #1 movie of 2010 has since been bested by several other films from that year, very high up on this list, as you will soon see. But I still have a soft spot for Boyle's thrillingly creative way of documenting a man's five-plus day struggle with his hand stuck between two rocks in a remote canyon in Utah, a real-life scenario that prompted him to do something to his own body most of us could never imagine having the nerve and resolve to do, even to save our own lives. Any sense of stasis and claustrophobia you'd think this subject might engender is exploded by all the visual tricks, fantasy sequences and other cinematic derring-do Boyle had accumulated to that point of his career, all culminating in an enormously satisfying emotional payoff. James Franco does the rest.
16. If Beale Street Could Talk (2018, Barry Jenkins) - This is the only film in my top 25 that I didn't see in time to rank in its given year (though I did see it in the theater); not only that, I also only just saw it this past year, making its rapid ascent up my list of favorites all the more impressive. My first viewing in February told me it was a contender, but the second was when I just sat awash in the beauty -- and yes, sorrow -- that Jenkins captures on screen. There may have been no more urgent cinematic yawp this decade that feels less self-righteous and lessony. It's just a forthright look at the joys and indignities that African-American families have experienced for decades, through the lens of gifted storytellers, and from the mouths of one of the decade's best acting ensembles. Beale Street may not be able to talk, but fortunately, Barry Jenkins can.
15. A Separation (2011, Asghar Farhadi) - Farhadi may have had the greatest decade of any director, as three of his films were in legitimate consideration for my top 25. A Separation, my #1 of 2011, bested The Past and Everyone Knows but forms a trio with them in Farhadi's career-long exploration of the way the low-level disputes between families and neighbors can play out as intricate social mysteries. That's maybe too reductive a description of what Farhadi is doing, but there's no doubting his skill at doing it, and A Separation is his most exquisitely detailed and painful example of how life can unravel through miscommunications and microaggressions that get blown out of proportion. Specifically here, he examines how marriages can fail even when everyone wants to compromise. To watch A Separation is to be in its thrall.
14. Boyhood (2014, Richard Linklater) - And five years later, Boyhood finally wins the battle with Birdman. I may have been more wowed by the latter's flashier technique in 2014, but Linklater's 12-years-in-the-making critical darling is probably the more daring cinematic experiment, one that pays rich dividends. (It also makes him one of two directors, along with the director of my #11, to have a movie appear both this decade and last.) The coming of age of Mason Evans Jr. hits a cinematic sweet spot for me that has been present in many a past favorite, which I described in this post as the "uncontrollable slippage of time." Although there are plenty of moments that explore this theme, in terms of sheer tugging at my emotional heartstrings, there's no better 1-2 punch than Mason's mom painting over her kids' height measurements as if it were nothing, followed by Mason's bestie trying to keep up on his bike as the family rides out of town, never to be seen again. Such is life.
13. Parasite (2019, Bong Joon-hoo) - I only just blurbed about Parasite earlier this week when I named it my #1 of 2019. But I could never be all blurbed out on a film with this many angles and this much depth. Why it's not only my best film of the year but also one of the best of the decade is that it has a little something for everyone, but not in some pandering, safe-for-the-multiplexes way. Bong's film entertains, educates and excavates in equal measure, that last somewhat literally as it explores the way those who are metaphorically buried in society try to assert their own prerogatives and entitlements. They are both victims and victimizers, as are the rich family who may only be nice (and only superficially) because they can afford to be. None of us are going to come to good ends if we can't figure out how to better share the dividends a prosperous world has to offer.
12. A Ghost Story (2017, David Lowery) - So #MeToo rascal Casey Affleck is in this. So what. He spends most of his time hidden from view in the decade's best film about people in sheets since Django Unchained. All kidding aside, I did not see this as Affleck's story of loss, dislocation, purgatory, and yes, the uncontrollable slippage of time. I saw it as any person's, as every person's. The sheet has a way of neutering and democratizing the protagonist so you can project yourself onto its blank slate, a feat I accomplished incredibly well my first time (my #1 movie of 2017), not quite so well the second, and then incredibly well again the third. That averages out to #12 of the decade for this spooky, thought-provoking, emotionally rich and existentially expansive realization of something that might have originated as a joke. A Ghost Story is anything but. It's the type of heady mindbender that dominated my list last decade, but was in regrettably short supply this time around.
11. Beyond the Hills (2012, Cristian Mungiu) - Beyond the Hills is the only 2012 film to make this list, but I ranked it in the year it became available in English-speaking countries (2013), making it the only film since Run Lola Run in 1999 to be #1 in a year other than that of its initial release. This ranking also makes Mungiu one of only two directors (along with Richard Linklater) to make this list both this decade and last (4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days). But let's not waste all the available space on trivia. Beyond the Hills is the most painful breakup movie of the decade, which is strange, because it's actually a movie about a young lesbian who may need to have the devil exorcised from her in a Romanian convent -- or so the nuns and priest think when they just can't figure out anything else. Mungiu is a master of mis en scene and the slow-burning unraveling of good intentions.
10. Under the Skin (2014, Jonathan Glazer) - Under the Skin is the Forgetting Sarah Marshall of this decade. If that seems like a weird comp, let me explain. Marshall pulled off the nifty feat of being #18 of both the year it was released and the decade, which meant that in only two years, its importance increased to me in leaps and bounds. Under the Skin has had longer to make the ascent, but it was "only" #10 of the year it was released before landing at #10 for the decade. I just kept watching Under the Skin -- four times in total -- and each time became more amazed by its indelible weirdness. Stephen Metcalf of The Slate Culture Gabfest openly wondered if it was just a "nothingburger," something undeniably interesting to consume that has no thematic protein. I don't pretend to know what Glazer was saying for sure in this movie, and I suspect he wouldn't want to ascribe one definitive meaning, but it's clear he's presenting for us notions related to understanding the peculiarities of the human race as though it were being viewed by an alien. That is pretty much literally what is happening, but there's so much more going on here, accompanied by Micah Levy's unforgettable score and some of the most brilliant and technically accomplished abstract filmmaking of the decade (I still don't know how they filmed that motorcycle at high speed from behind). Even as an alien, Scarlett Johansson is the ultimate viewer surrogate, making us look at ourselves -- what we love, what we hate, how we treat people -- like few other films.
9. First Reformed (2018, Paul Schrader) - In the rewatching I did for this list, I rewatched First Reformed in November of 2018 -- and then again in October of 2019. That second rewatch was not because I doubted anything about my #1 movie of 2018, but just for pleasure -- a particularly telling comment when rewatch slots were at a premium in finalizing this list. The least likely director to make this list (other than maybe my #22), Paul Schrader delivered something that kept me rigid in my seat with engagement and thrills. "Thrills" are not a word you would typically use for something Schrader himself characterized as "slow cinema," but I found the way this film addressed the tug-of-war between hope and hopelessness that exists in any person to be thrilling indeed. It's a battle waged both by the environmentalist and the man of God, and Ethan Hawke plays both in this film, a pastor of a small church who has his eyes opened to the way we are destroying our world, and implicitly, to the way God is failing to save us from that. This mostly realistic film has a couple wild flights of fancy that just cement First Reformed as a perfect way we can use the tools of cinema to augment truth. On a personal note, it reminded me of my dad, who has taken on environmentalism with a vengeance in the past two decades, and before that served as facilities manager for an 18th century church not unlike Ernst Toller's. His own brave struggle against hopelessness is the only way we can continue to fight the good environmental fight.
8. The Blackcoat's Daughter (2017, Osgood Perkins) - And a horror movie makes my top ten of the decade. Not just any horror movie, but maybe the only horror movie of this decade that truly wormed itself inside me and wouldn't leave, maybe the only horror movie of this decade that gave me as many chills on my third viewing as it did on my first. (And as it's the only horror movie of the decade that I watched three times, that's saying something in and of itself.) For reasons that seem very unsatisfactory, this film is known as February in certain markets, Australia included, but that title just doesn't have the same knack for expressing the depths of Osgood Perkins' terrifying portrayal of devil possession on the wintry grounds of an all-girls boarding school. Shot in a throwback 70s style that became popular this decade, The Blackcoat's Daughter follows a revelatory Keirnan Shipka as she starts acting stranger as a result of ... well, something she can see out of the corner of her eye, just over the shoulder of whoever she's talking to. We see what this thing is, eventually, and we also see what it inspires her to do. The movie is cold and dark and spooky as hell, featuring indistinct voices on the other end of telephone lines, and furnaces that are the sites of profane prayer rituals. It's a distinct enough treasure in today's film landscape to be worthy of my highest decade-end honors.
7. Inside Out (2015, Pete Docter) - In a great decade for animation, it may be no surprise that my highest ranked #1 movie of the year is a Pixar movie. (But, it may be a surprise that my highest ranked #1 is only #7 for the decade -- I guess you really can't be sure what's going to endure with you when you first see it.) Like a couple other films in my top ten I have yet to discuss, Inside Out left me sobbing in the theater, an especially embarrassing outcome considering that my family was sitting there watching with me. But it was that communal experience -- the theater was full with similar families on a special preview screening -- that helped make this as indelible an experience as it was. When we weren't crying, we were in hysterics, as Inside Out is the family film that truly has everything: heart, humor, emotional maturity, cute characters, a high concept, and also one of the most profound considerations of how the human brain works that you are likely to see on film, all the more incredible for the fact that it can be consumed quite intuitively by a child. My youngest son was not with us -- he was only 18 months old -- but the four-year-old had no trouble groking what was going on here, and even had his own insightful comments about it afterward. Inside Out has not remained at quite the same stratospheric level for me on two subsequent viewings, but that was probably inevitable as there is literally no place for a film like this to go but down. For all the reasons listed above, it remains one of the most outstanding accomplishments of this, or one might say any, decade.
6. Like Father, Like Son (2013, Hirokazu Kore-eda) - So much for not liking a movie if you watch it under less than ideal circumstances. I was recovering from having a tooth pulled when I watched the movie that introduced me to Hirokazu Kore-eda, the prolific filmmaker who made several other great films this decade, including Shoplifters. I watched it on my laptop while lying in bed. But the waterworks produced by this film had nothing to do with the agony in my teeth. Kore-eda makes perhaps the most high concept of his many humanist family dramas, presenting us with the impossible scenario of two families who discover that they have been raising each others' sons for the past seven years as a result of a mix-up at the hospital. Do they switch back, or not? A story that sounds like it has its roots in an outrageous and tawdry tabloid scandal is perhaps the most thought-provoking movie on parenting of the entire decade, wrestling as it does with themes of nature vs. nurture, biological blood ties vs. practical family ties, and simply right vs. wrong. I don't know that I can think of a tighter or more perfect script from this past decade, as there's nary a wasted scene, and nary a line of dialogue that doesn't in some way advance the unimaginable dilemma at the film's core. Kore-eda established himself as the modern Ozu this past decade, and this is his greatest achievement.
5. Tanna (2016, Martin Butler & Bentley Dean) - If I needed one single justification for watching a hundred human rights movies, most of them documentaries, over the course of two years for the Human Rights Arts & Film Festival (HRAFF), then Tanna is it. Upon queuing it up for viewing one night in August of 2016, I looked at it as no different from my other "HRAFF homework," perhaps even slightly more warily, as I considered movies about native peoples to be very well-intentioned but to contain limited upside. Boy was I wrong about that. Two hours later, I was bawling like a baby and quivering with a mind newly opened about the possibility of me loving a film like this. By the following May I had already seen it three times, the last two utterly of my own choosing, and the last one on the big screen at the festival itself. I was overjoyed when it was nominated as best foreign language film the January before that May, and though I don't recommend it to just anyone, I have already made several converts. (Side note: My wife also receives a thank you in the film, as she sat on the board that approved some additional funding for the film.) Tanna is quite simply my favorite love story of the decade, though it's weirdly a heterosexual love story that's standing in for a gay one. Wawa (Marie Wawa) and Dain (Mungau Dain) can't marry each other because she is arranged to be married to a man from another tribe, to keep the peace between them. Being able to love who you want, in a way that seems like it mirrors the fight for gay marriage, is one of the many beautiful dreams this beautiful film strives for.
4. The Social Network (2010, David Fincher) - This is probably the movie in my top ten that will make the most other top tens, or has made them, since most of those posted a couple weeks ago. But there's a reason for that. Among David Fincher's many well-oiled machines, this may be my favorite. The story of the rise of Mark Zuckerberg himself may not be inherently interesting, but the story of the rise of social media should be an enduring document for decades to come, especially when told by a storyteller with the prodigious gifts of Fincher. Assisted by probably my favorite score of the decade from my favorite musician (Trent Reznor), Fincher gives us a blow-by-blow origin story of the dominant new communication modality of our times, a he-said/he-said/sometimes-she-said account of ambition and betrayal, told with the whip-smart writing of Aaron Sorkin and performances to match. Jesse Eisenberg offers us a sociopath who also reminds us of every insecure misfit we know, himself a slave to the very phenomenon of FOMO that he would single-handedly cultivate -- or steal, if you believe the Winklevai. And it all grew out of a lonely walk back to Harvard from the bar where he'd just been dumped by his girlfriend for being too much of an ass, scored to Reznor's "Hand Covers Bruise." It may have been the most impactful bruise of the 21st century.
3. Rabbit Hole (2010, John Cameron Mitchell) - While my #2 and #1 spots on this list were pretty etched in stone coming in, with only the order uncertain, my #3 was totally wide open, allowing a recent rewatch to really sway me one way or another. I was surprised that this viewing swayed me to only my 7th ranked movie of 2010, Rabbit Hole. Surprised because it's a movie about grief, and I have been fortunate never to have had to grieve someone who was very close to me or taken long before their time. That's the prospect facing Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart as they recover (eight months later) from their young son having been hit by a car. David Lindsay-Abaire's adaptation of his own play was also an incredibly surprising choice for Mitchell after he'd directed the sensationalist films Hedwig and the Angry Inch and Shortbus. But he was the right director to get painfully honest and precise performances from Eckhart and Kidman, not to mention a wonderful supporting cast that includes Sandra Oh, Dianne Wiest and Miles Teller -- the last of whom plays the shell-shocked teenager who was behind the wheel, who writes himself a comic book about alternate dimensions to try to wish himself out of the events of this one. This is a humanistic masterpiece that provides truth in its every moment, and it left me a shattered, snotty wreck even on my third viewing of it, even though I was in a vacation house in Hawaii and I knew everything that was going to happen. Rabbit Hole is that good.
2. Spring Breakers (2013, Harmony Korine) - How did a movie I gave only four stars out of five when I first saw it, and was only the #7 film of its year, climb all the way up to my #2 of the decade, with a real shot at #1? Repeat viewings. In fact, six total viewings, tying it for the most this decade with my #1 movie (and in three fewer years). With each new exposure to Harmony Korine's collage-like ode to the linked ideas of celebration, belongingness, aggression and misspent youth, I became a little more fascinated and entranced by the achievement. It's also the best cinematic encapsulation I've seen of the melancholy of staying at a party too long, specifically, and of things ending, generally. Some people whose jaws are now dropping at this choice will have mistaken this for some kind of T&A-inspired bit of disposable youth culture garbage, but I feel sorry for them, because they have not seen (or heard, thanks to Skrillex and Cliff Martinez) the real Spring Breakers. It probably takes at least one viewing to figure out what you've really got here, as indicated by my original four-star rating, but it's so much -- a non-judgmental insight into various different people trying to find and understand themselves in a Southern Florida that represents, for them, a sort of utopia. Even if that utopia involves guns, drugs and gold teeth in the form of one of the decade's great characters, James Franco's Alien, who at his core is just as uncertain and scared as any of us.
1. Tangled (2010, Nathan Greno & Byron Howard) - If you had told me my #1 movie of the decade would be an animated film, I would have been very surprised -- until I realized that Toy Story would have been my #2 movie of the 1990s, and very close to overtaking Pulp Fiction. When it came down to a choice between this and my #2, who were the only two serious contenders for this top spot (and are just as diametrically opposed as Toy Story and Pulp Fiction), the deciding factor was the sense of ownership. I feel like Tangled is mine, and there is probably no movie I recommend to people from this past decade with more of a sense that I am its personal ambassador. That's because I was the first person I knew who saw Tangled, on the day of its release on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving in 2010, after having just written a snarky post about the movie's stupid title earlier in the day. That set the stage for me to be overwhelmed by the degree to which it surpassed my expectations, probably by more of a margin than any other film in the decade. I laughed -- for a full minute in the case of Flynn's line just before the above image. I cried -- multiple times near the end. And the rest of the time, chills were never far from the surface. All three things still occurred on my sixth viewing two weeks ago, tying with my #2 for the most viewings this decade. (Oh, and as a sign of my fierce loyalty in the ongoing Tangled vs. Frozen debate, I didn't even see Frozen II.) As a final bit of evidence, I've written about Tangled more than any other single film on this blog, tagging it 11 times in posts not including this one, one more than Avatar (so maybe that's not saying as much as I thought). Simply put, there is no film from the 2010s I cherish more than I cherish Tangled, and that's why it is my #1.