#035 - Top 200 Movies of the Decade (125-101)

#200-176

#175-151

#150-126

In the interest of full disclosure, I have (since the beginning of this list) seen Sherlock Holmes and Avatar--two movies which some people had previously asked about relating to their rankings. Unfortunately, I'm not going to be listing them anywhere on here, because the list I made started with 200 movies that I had seen and there wasn't any room for inserting things. Maybe future lists, but not this one. Though to be fair, I'll just say that I really did enjoy Sherlock Holmes. It has a fantastic soundtrack and I think Robert Downey, Jr., was fun to watch--even though his Sherlock Holmes wasn't "THE Sherlock Holmes" everyone has kind of silently agreed upon in our imaginations. And Avatar was an absolute marvel in regards to its visuals--I've never seen anything like it and I'm sure most people haven't--though the story itself left a lot to be desired. For me, I think a good story trumps a good aesthetic, but that's not to say that a mind-blowingly creative movie like Avatar is not better than a movie with a pretty good story but not pizazz. Because it is. Certainly it would have a spot on this countdown, I'm not entirely sure where, but somewhere in the top 150 for certain. The problem with Avatar is that the graphics are so other-worldly for right now, but in ten years, it'll seem like chump change, and we'll be left with a mediocre plot to try and redeem it. This is why movies like The Matrix are so astounding when they're released but get kicked down a few notches every year. What makes it special is very fleeting. The Godfather, on the other hand, only gets better with time, because its premise is transcendental--its always interesting to look at movies from the past and see how their themes and character arcs match up with real-life events that have occurred since its release. And sure, maybe someday we'll infiltrate a planet with blue beings and floating mountains--but I kind of doubt that when we do, anyone will remember the movie Avatar.

And on with the list:

125. Good Night and Good Luck (George Clooney, 2005) - I think this, for me, is a perfect example of a movie that's fantastically executed, but not fantastic. It's well acted, well directed, well written, and has a crisp, accurate feel to it. But I don't think it really did anything new or moved me in any profound way. It was what it was--a well made movie that gave David Strathairn a chance to shine after a long, under-appreciated career of being "Oh he's that guy from that one movie".

124. Where the Wild Things Are (Spike Jonze, 2009) - So much promise, so much buildup, all the leaked internet images and pirated clips on YouTube, and the result was a movie that naturally upset some Maurice Sendak purists, but ultimately impressed me greatly. I loved the creatures, they were well-designed and unique, and certainly the movie strayed a bit from the storyline of the book, but that shouldn't take away from it. It's very moving, very emotional, and features a great performance by young Max Records (as Max, aptly) and a really fun soundtrack by Karen O and Carter Burwell. Don't kid yourself, it's a sad sad movie, a way for Spike Jonze and Dave Eggers to recreate Peter Pan--an aching ode in the name of childhood and loneliness.

123. The Boys of Baraka (Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, 2005) - A little-known documentary about a group of boys from the neighborhoods of Baltimore who are given the opportunity to travel to Kenya and learn at a renowned boys' school. Truly eye-opening and moving. It makes you want to pluck every child growing up in a harsh environment and whisk them away to somewhere safe where they can flourish and be themselves. The end of the movie is heart-wrenching as the boys face the future of returning to the projects and a potential life of misery and crime.

122. The Last Samurai (Edward Zwick, 2003) - A kind of forgotten movie of the decade, perhaps because Tom Cruise has turned into a robot zombie, but it was a good one. Especially memorable for me thanks to Ken Watanabe's breakthrough performance. I really liked how they gave you an objective take on the main character--here was a guy who didn't need your pity, didn't need you to identify with him, but he was presented with a remarkable circumstance and out of it, he gained a new appreciation for other cultures, for loyalty, for bravery. Maybe it was Dances With Wolves 2, maybe it was "based on historical events", but I think that if the movie is good enough, you won't be consciously considering those comparisons throughout the course of the film. This was good enough to pass that test for me.

121. Shaun of the Dead (Edgar Wright, 2004) - A perfectly timed spoof movie, with zombie films hitting their critical mass around that time (thanks to successes like 28 Days Later), but unlike Scary Movie and its ridiculous brethren, Shaun of the Dead actually has a decent storyline, funny jokes, and even a few chills. My personal favorite moment from this movie is when Shaun's friend is ripped apart while climbing through the window. So deliciously gory.

120. I Am Sam (Jessie Nelson, 2001) - It has kind of entered into a bit of a joke stage with the reference in Tropic Thunder, but I Am Sam still stands out as a terrific movie with a really moving performance by Sean Penn. While I'm a little uncomfortable about people acting like disabled characters, I think he was pretty fair in his portrayal--even if he didn't have as many faculties as Hoffman's Rain Man. This was the last time I really liked Dakota Fanning in a movie.

119. Thirteen (Catherine Hardwicke, 2003) - Twisted. But it should be commended for its realistic take on the lives of teens. It was really edgy for a number of reasons, but notably, stars Evan Rachel Wood and Nikki Reed (who co-wrote the film based on her own life experiences) were actually young teenagers at the time, not 20-year olds playing teens. If anything I think it should have been a warning out to parents that their kids are not the innocent angels they might believe them to be, but because of the controversial subject matter I'm sure the only people who saw this movie were in the 18-30 set.

118. This Is England (Shane Meadows, 2006) - I heard this movie was good, and a well-written story, and it ended up being everything I had hoped for and more. It's about a oft-picked-on kid who starts hanging with a crew of tough skinheaded older teens, starts making out with his much-older groupie girlfriend, and eventually dives into the world of racist neo-Nazism. While the story itself shows how strong the bonds of acceptance and friendship are, it also tells the very important message that sometimes being part of the gang is not everything--having a place to hang might not be worth succumbing to mob mentality. A fantastic movie, really, and though it does historically mirror a lot of modern English social movements, the themes can be adapted almost anywhere.

117. Rescue Dawn (Werner Herzog, 2006) - Christian Bale destroys his body; we benefit. Similar to The Machinist, Bale withered away to almost nothing for his role as a fighter pilot caught in the jungles of Laos. It might be based on a true story (with some historical inaccuracies of course), but regardless it's a moving tale--though I don't want to dip into cliches of "bravery" and "courage". Really, it's about survival--what they did to survive, to try and make it out of the jungles alive. Steve Zahn gets the underappreciated award on this one. He might not normally be the world's greatest actor, but I give him a hell of a round of applause for his performance in this movie.

116. The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow, 2008) - A really in vogue movie right now, winning all kinds of awards and being hot on Avatar's tail for Oscar front-runner. To me, it was a really good movie, very well-done with the suspense and insight necessary for a to-date Iraq War movie. Jeremy Renner is good as the borderline psychopath, but I think it's the web of different character personas that makes the movie so good. Really makes you ache for everything that's going on over there.

115. Blood Diamond (Edward Zwick, 2006) - First off, I want to take Leonardo DiCaprio's accent in this movie and blow it off the face of the planet. But if I'm able to remove that from consideration, what we're left with is a pretty solid movie, which I feel was definitely carried by Djimon Hounsou. His character is the emotional compass for the film, I personally could care less about what happens to Leo, and it's a little remarkable that he didn't receive more acclaim for this role. Considering how many movies out there that portray white people as saviors of African people, it's kind of nice to have a movie that outright admits to the whites' exploitation of the natives (even if he does kind of come back to be a hero in the end).

114. Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (Sidney Lumet, 2007) - With a family like the one in this movie, who needs enemies? Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke (somehow?) play a pair of brothers who rob their parents' jewelry store and end up in a horribly complicated cluster(screw). It's almost one of those movies that preys on so many coincidences you want to scream, but the unadulterated cruelty with which the characters treat one another saves it and makes it a dandy. You kind of need a shower after this movie.

113. About Schmidt (Alexander Payne, 2002) - Jack Nicholson famously accepted his award for Best Actor - Drama by deadpanning, "I thought we made a comedy." In every way, this movie attempted to be a comedy about old age and curmudgeoness (curmudgeody?) that played with the concept of fish-out-of-water: first, with the never grown up Jack playing an old man on his last legs, and second, with his character Schmidt being wholly unable to function in his life after the loss of his long-time wife. But no matter how clever and dark they thought they were being, the inherent emotionality of the story kept coming through, especially during the final sequence, one of the most universal tear-jerking scenes in recent cinema. It's almost worth the Kathy Bates nude scene.

112. The Matrix: Revolutions (Wachowski Bros, 2003) - Why do I like this movie so much? I'm not even sure. I think it was a fitting end to the Matrix Trilogy, gathered up a bunch of loose ends thanks to some standard deus ex machina moves, and really hammered home the Neo as savior point. Personally, I think it strayed from the original movie and its intentions, but how could I be the one to question that? It still provided a huge amount of visceral fight sequences and tension, a passable storyline, and was an experience entirely worth having on the big screen. They might have done nothing worthwhile since (yes that includes V for Vendetta) but The Matrix is a highly successful trilogy, like it or not.

111. Junebug (Phil Morrison, 2005) - By now, everyone knows Amy Adams has chops. But almost nobody had heard of her before this movie, a touching story about family and love and wanting to reach out and save someone from being swept under the rug. Luckily this movie was kept from being swept under the rug as well, and gained enough of a cult following to get it some critical applause--of which it is well deserving.

110. Fahrenheit 9/11 (Michael Moore, 2004) - It was the skewering we were all hoping for, much funnier than one could have imagined, and a fitting tribute to George W.'s reign as President. It lacks the depth of Bowling for Columbine, and probably stretched the truth a good bit more, but in terms of entertainment value, ranks right up there with the best documentaries ever. Really makes you feel like Michael Moore is quite a weasel at times, but if you can look past that, there is a lot to be absorbed here--both politically and cinematically.

109. Layer Cake (Matthew Vaughn, 2004) - Honestly if you can tell me the name of Daniel Craig's character, I will be impressed, because I have no idea. This was the movie that was destined to launch a bunch of careers--Craig's and director Vaughn's, most notably--but Vaughn backed out of X3 to stay with his family and unfortunately he hasn't taken off the same way. Every few years we really need one of these fresh, bold action/crime thrillers to keep our blood pumping, and Layer Cake took the torch from Snatch and waved it admirably.

108. The Last King of Scotland (Kevin Macdonald, 2006) - Might be a little lower than some would imagine, and I'll just say this--I'm not the hugest fan of Forest Whitaker's performance as Idi Amin. I know he won the Oscar and got all the pub, but I'm not sure why, considering his role in the movie was very small and James McAvoy carried it from start to finish. I think it was still a very well made movie and a story that needed to be told, but at times I lost touch with its "based on a true story" nature, and I think the potentially momentous impact it could have had was dampened.

107. Identity (James Mangold, 2003) - A case where I just kind of sit back and say, "I don't know why, but I love this movie." Sorry. It's true. Not the greatest of stories, not the greatest directing or acting, but ever since seeing this movie in theaters, I've loved it, I think it hits on being creepy and suspenseful without being obnoxious, I like (or at least used to like) John Cusack as a lead, and the other characters and the isolated setting make for a really successful thriller. I was a little surprised when I saw that it was James Mangold, who has gone on to direct straight-laced dramas like 3:10 to Yuma and Walk the Line, but this one will always have a special place in my heart.

106. District 9 (Neill Blomkamp, 2009) - Before I had seen this movie, I was kind of sick of it. I wasn't sure what all the fuss was about--it looked like a standard alien movie, how could that be groundbreaking? But I saw it. And I loved it. Maybe it's not as revolutionary as they'd like you to believe, but that's not the point. It has a good story, it's very well directed and conceived, and wholly unknown Sharlto Copley dominates his role like few others. Definitely had one of the single best jaw-dropping moments of any movie this year--when they unwrap the bandage.

105. Rabbit-Proof Fence (Phillip Noyce, 2002) - Baz Luhrmann tried to make the movie Australia into the country Australia's one great historical epic feature, and by all accounts, he failed. But when you have a movie like this one, what else do you need? An incredibly informative and risky story about young half-aboriginal girls who escape from an internment camp and elude an experienced tracker to travel back to their hometown. The story of potential racial cleansing in Australia is one that needs to be more familiar to people in America. And this movie helps.

104. Super-Size Me (Morgan Spurlock, 2004) - I'm shocked and disgusted that I actually ate far less McDonald's before seeing this movie than I have since, but that is more a result of convenience and laziness than it is the success of the documentary. Certainly it's a contrived idea, eating any kind of food of that nature for one month will put a strain on your body. And maybe Morgan Spurlock ended up being quite an ass, but he took a novel concept, piled on lots of information about nutrition, and made it very enjoyable. Everybody was talking about this movie for a month, and rightly so. It didn't bring any new ideas about fast food to the table, but his approach was entertaining and memorable.

103. Be Kind Rewind (Michel Gondry, 2008) - This is part because I like how funny, clever, and heartfelt the story of the movie is, and part because I'm truly fascinated by the inventive visuals created in the film to re-imagine favorites like Ghostbusters and Men in Black. Michel Gondry is a magician with a camera. What some directors spend millions of dollars on with computer generated effects, Gondry does with streamers and panes of glass and cardboard. I sincerely hope that this movie makes everyone smile.

102. The Italian Job (F. Gary Gray, 2003) - A coincidence that I listed two Mos Def movies back to back? Probably. But I do really like the guy as an actor, he shows his terrific sense of humor in this movie, one which developed a really strong following upon release and showcases a brilliant combination of quick action and quick wit. TV shows these days about criminals turned good are all the rage, and I think that concept draws a lot of people towards this movie--here are bad guys, who are just like you and me, that get sucker punched by their "friend" and want to teach him a lesson. It's a fun ride where legal consequences are imaginary and thieves one-up each other with dazzling displays of choreography. Good cast, good fun, really tough to argue against.

101. The Queen (Stephen Frears, 2006) - I think a lot of people confused Helen Mirren for the actual Queen after the release of this movie, which was notable for the angle it took on a very sensitive subject that is still fresh in the minds of many Britons. Her performance was very good (though I don't think quite legendary) and Michael Sheen again put in a good turn as an affable man in the public eye. Critically raved by all, and though I don't think it was quite as good as some of the other films released that year, it is still one that is definitely worth seeing--but it should be noted that I personally have only a vague grasp of the events following Diana's death, so my discrimination in terms of accuracy is quite low.

I'm sorry it's taking me so long. But I love building the suspense, don't you?

#034 - Top 200 Movies of the Decade (150-126)

To check out #200-176, click here.

To check out #175-151, click here.

I feel obligated to issue an apology to lots of people. Ever since this list started, I've been getting a lot of questions, "Is such-and-such going to be on your list?" and inevitably, when I answer, "No," the reaction is usually one of disappointment (and in the rare case, scorn). This is an inexact science. And it's not impressive enough to be called an "art". I've seen... let me see 685 movies from the first decade of the 21st century. A decent amount of them were garbage. A handful were extraordinary. But most of them were middle of the road. The kind of movies I enjoyed once or possibly twice, but they left me with little long-lasting impression save for a couple one-liners or a memorable scene. That's just the nature of movies, or anything really. You might have an iTunes library of 3000 songs. But you don't LOVE all of them. You might really like 200, you might kind of hate 200, and the rest are just pretty solid songs that have their time and place--but if you were forced to eliminate them like in a desert island scenario, they just wouldn't make the cut. So I apologize if you're not thrilled with my list. I can bet that if I was reading lists that my friends put together, I'd disagree on a bunch as well. But the one thing I don't want is for people to think that they're somehow lesser people for liking movies I didn't particularly like. Just because I'm really into movies doesn't mean I'm a certified measuring stick. I feel like I've given this impression off to a lot of people, and I don't like it. I don't really want to be an elitist when it comes to these things. I'd just rather be the guy who you turn to when you can't remember the name of the guy who directed Zodiac or the woman who played Harry's mom in Requiem for a Dream. Don't let me opinions become judgments. Please.

Now let's continue:

150. Burn After Reading (Coen Brothers, 2008) - In a way, this was the Coens' "let's ease it down" project after the epic effort that was No Country for Old Men. An Oscar puts a lot of pressure on people to produce a repeat, especially for artists who spent a lot of their careers operating beneath radar. And let's face it--while the general public might know and appreciate their films (especially hits like Fargo and The Big Lebowski), there's also a good chance that they didn't even know they were made by the same people. The Coens don't lord over their films like an obnoxious presence (a la Spike Lee or Michael Bay) and they aren't (weren't) popular enough to be used for marketing (Tarantino or Spielberg), so their name just kind of got lost in the shuffle, until the Oscar. While their speeches might have been lifeless and dreary, their films are anything but, and I think that's the kind of statement they were making with Burn After Reading. They made a fun movie that kept everyone's attention that wasn't bound to sweep year-end awards, but was still totally worthwhile and executed with a more skillful hand than your average film school grad director. Brad Pitt was great, losing himself in a character who isn't Brad Pitt, and John Malkovich was hysterical. Nothing wrong here.

149. Jarhead (Sam Mendes, 2005) - On the opposite end of the spectrum as far as intent is concerned, I think Mendes fell in to the trap of gunning for Oscar after American Beauty killed as much as it did. At first glance, Jarhead was lined up to take home awards and really wow people, and I believe it fell quite short--but luckily enough it was aiming so high that it was still a really good movie. I liked Jake Gyllenhaal in this one, I think some of his fellow soldiers were a little bit cartoonish, but he was easy to identify with, at least for me, trying to put myself in his shoes. It's an interesting take on the war genre--instead of being told a story of soldiers on the front lines in nonstop action (like Saving Private Ryan or Letters From Iwo Jima), it's a more psychological story of young men who have sacrificed everything to travel to Kuwait, but who end up operating as little more than clean up, never really being able to fulfill their desires as soldiers.

148. The Brothers Bloom (Rian Johnson, 2008) - Rian Johnson was a pretty hot name after Brick, and he followed it up with a more fanciful and whimsical story of two brothers who make a living as con artists, but who do it with a very extraordinary flare. Adrien Brody is kind of stuck in a rut of playing brooding oddballs, and he wasn't especially terrific to me in this one, but I liked Mark Ruffalo as the older brother, protective of the younger Bloom even when he doesn't appear to be. The plot moves along very crisply, there are a lot of odds and ends in the story (as it is about con men who aim to make a grand tale out of everything) but little of it is wasteful. Rachel Weisz is engaging though not entirely believable as the clueless millionaire Penelope Stamp, and it's her inclusion that really gets the movie off and running. Johnson successfully proved that he is very talented and did not just catch lightning in a bottle with Brick.

147. Finding Nemo (Andrew Stanton, 2003) - On the scale of children's movies that appeal to adults, Finding Nemo skews pretty young. It might lack the action of The Incredibles and the ribald of Shrek, but it's still a fantastic movie, particularly for the recreation of underwater life and the insane number of species portrayed. The voice actors I could take or leave, but the renderings were spectacular and the story was well-crafted. Easy enough for kids to follow, and touching enough for adults to appreciate.

146. Wristcutters: A Love Story (Goran Dukic, 2006) - Based on a story by uber-hailed Israeli author Etgar Keret, Wristcutters takes suicide and purgatory and turns them into a quirky, thoughtful journey (though I know anyone who has ever dealt with these concepts first hand probably wouldn't think that is appropriate--and they wouldn't be wrong). In the movie, everyone who commits suicide is sent to a different afterlife, one that is just like real life, except much more depressing. They can't smile, the landscape is drab, and their lives have no direction--except for Zia (Patrick Fugit) who is on a mission to find his former girlfriend, who had also committed suicide. Along the way he meets and befriends a couple other denizens of this purgatory, each with their own backstory and (sometimes) charming quirks. I think it's the completeness of the world that made me enjoy the movie the most. From a plot standpoint, the arc of the movie is not that original--guy in search of girl meets other girl and falls in love--but the setting and the characters are pretty rich and definitely intriguing. Tip of the hat to Tom Waits, who plays Kneller, an afterlife camp director with mysterious powers.

145. The Hangover (Todd Phillips, 2009) - Todd Phillips has hit a few home runs recently, with Old School and Starsky & Hutch, but none of his films became quite the phenomenon that The Hangover did--and it did so almost immediately. A lot of people would probably admit that Iron Mike's presence in the trailer was a draw--and it was--but the movie ended up being one giant circus act, with scene after scene of absurdity and almost no let up on the gas pedal. Zach Galfianakis plays the one-liner guy (and the fat guy with the funny outfits), Ed Helms plays the guy with the crazy facial expressions, and Bradley Cooper is the straight man. It was undoubtedly the comedy hit of 2009, and most likely due to recency bias, will stand for now as the most loved comedy of the decade.

144. A Serious Man (Coen Brothers, 2009) - I wrote up a review of this film here, and it basically explains how I liked it, but couldn't really explain why. I think of all the Coen films, it probably had the least vibrant story to work with, but still was incredibly effective at eliciting an emotional response, likely due to the shot selection and musical choices. It stands to me as a guidebook for directors on how to make the audience react the way you want them to react--even without the necessary material.

143. JCVD (Mabrouk El Mechri, 2008) - A strong movie starring Jean-Claude Van Damme as a sad (though humanized) version of himself who is mistaken as the perpetrator of a robbery that he's actually a hostage of. It's a very creative story (and occasionally crosses the fourth wall of the audience-actor boundary), telling the tale of a movie star on the down and out while almost simultaneously reinventing his career. Van Damme has long been kind of a robotic and caricatured figure, but this movie definitely presents him in a new light--even if it does suffer from a noticeably poor stage shoot.

142. Lars and the Real Girl (Craig Gillespie, 2007) - I think you sort of have to overlook the ridiculous nature of this movie's plot--that a quiet, lonely man orders a "real doll" from the internet and pretends that the doll is his girlfriend--and look at the interactions between the characters who are actually played by humans. Ryan Gosling is great. Maybe not as great as Half Nelson, but certainly a more dynamic performance than in Stay. And Emily Mortimer carries the movie from start to finish. She's compassionate, strong willed, and bright, and although I think a lot of people might wonder how this even became a real movie (and the silliness of it does come through quite often), there's a very basic theme going on underneath all of the sex doll absurdity: it hurts to be alone in life.

141. The Science of Sleep (Michel Gondry, 2006) - I'm a pretty big fan of Gael Garcia Bernal. He's going to end up with a slew of appearances on this list, partly because he's a good actor, and partly because he's chosen good projects to take part in. In The Science of Sleep, he's pretty childish, though not to a fault, since that is his character. We, as the audience, I think play Charlotte Gainsbourg's character, the level headed affectee of Bernal's antics, and certainly he does quickly vacillate between delightful and annoying. It was Gondry's first effort as writer-director, and it shows a lot of his already established celluloid personality--dream sequences, lo-fi effects, and sound and image distortion. I think his film-as-fantasy style works well here, especially when that fantasy is quickly jerked back into reality, an unfortunate byproduct for dreamers everywhere.

140. Borat (Larry Charles, 2006) - Maybe you've had enough of Sacha Baron Cohen by now, and maybe the teenager obsession with Borat has turned you off of it altogether, but I think we all have to admit that this movie was a worldwide event when it premiered. In an entertainment world where all "reality" is staged, I think audiences were crying out for staged reality that REALLY works. Cohen is relentlessly in character, perhaps to criminal ends, and Borat took the mostly UK-centered momentum he had from Ali G and unleashed it on the states. It's offensive and crude and in fifty years they'll look back and say, "How did anyone think this was funny?", but unless you're in a coma, this movie made you laugh out loud at least eight times.

139. Thank You For Smoking (Jason Reitman, 2005) - Movies often times take the style of their lead characters, and I can't think of a more shining example than this--slick, smooth, eye-catching, hip, whatever you want to say. Starting with an attention grabbing title and a surely polarizing theme, Reitman and Aaron Eckhart turn it into a zing-fest. There's polished speech, twisted psychology, and a very fast pace, but in the end, tobacco lobby representative Nick (Eckhart) is undone by what makes him so good in the first place--bravado and access to the industry's biggest secrets. In the end, it's not as much critical of big tobacco as it is of the entire process of policy in this nation. The country is run entirely on appearance instead of substance, perhaps a multi-layered critique Reitman would like to make of his industry.

138. American Splendor (Shari Springer Berman, 2003) - Paul Giamatti's coming out party. He had a lot of bit parts up until this movie, but like a bunch of other actors in recent years (Jamie Foxx, Philip Seymour Hoffman) he found limelight through a biopic. Unlike those guys, his subject was little known, but he still managed to deliver a killer performance. Made by documentary filmmakers, American Splendor has a very lifelike feel to it, and the understated acting lends itself well to that. There's not a lot of glamour here, but a good story.

137. Synechdoche, New York (Charlie Kaufman, 2008) - Given Kaufman's history as a writer (Eternal Sunshine, Adaptation, Being John Malkovich), I was incredibly pumped for his official debut as director. I think what I discovered was that the positive outlooks and vibrancy of the directors he had worked with before (Spike Jonze, Michel Gondry) nicely balanced with the razor sharp but ultimately depressing writing of Kaufman. So in his first opportunity to grab the reigns, a lot more of that sour disposition seemed to come out, and like Nicolas Cage in Adaptation, Philip Seymour Hoffman essentially plays Kaufman, this time as the director (coincidence?) of a stage play. There are so many rich nuggets in the story to overlook this movie, but I had sincerely hoped that it would have ended up much higher on the list than here.

136. Spiderman 2 (Sam Raimi, 2004) - People were huge on Spiderman. Me, not so much. I think Spiderman 2 was easily the best of the series (which I am proclaiming dead, despite reports of a Spiderman 4: Peter's back in high school sequel). Spidey 2 was a darker, more sinister movie than the first, and I think it benefited from that. That's where Raimi's strengths are--not in making glossy popcorn features. There's not a boatload of good acting in this one, but it was, in my opinion, a much stronger turn than the first. Spidey 1 and 3, unfortunately, don't make this list.

135. Solaris (Steven Soderbergh, 2002) - A creepy, vacuous movie remake of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 film and Stanislaw Lem's 1961 book. It's very thought-provoking, and emotional for a science fiction film. I'm not sure if Clooney was the right pick for the lead, but he did a pretty good job. Quick synopsis: a widower scientist (Clooney) is sent to a distant planet known for its psychological disturbances, and once there is given an opportunity to reunite with his dead wife. Interesting dynamic, for sure--all he wants in life is to be with her again, but he knows that what he's experiencing is not real, just an illusion. Terrific story, which can be attributed to the original Polish novel, and well-made film, which can be attributed to the cold precision of the camera and Cliff Martinez's fantastic score.

134. Irreversible (Gaspar Noe, 2002) - I waffled on seeing this movie for a long time, after a friend had informed me that it caused him pretty severe emotional pain for a movie. But eventually I sucked it up and watched it. It certainly made an impression. Artistically, it's an okay movie. But it employs reverse chronological narration well (though without the clever tricks of Memento) and utilizes film's expressive medium to deliver very strong, gut-wrenching attacks. I caution you against watching it, not because I think you'll be messed up by it, but just in case you are appalled and come back wondering why I didn't warn you.

133. Capote (Bennett Miller, 2005) - There was Deep Impact and Armageddon, Dante's Peak and Volcano, Independence Day and Mars Attacks!. And then there was Capote. And Infamous. And Philip Seymour Hoffman and Toby Jones, everyone touting their favorite, which was better, which was more realistic. I, for one, never saw Infamous, as it was released the year after Capote and I was thoroughly satisfied with what I had seen. It was definitely a good movie, carried as much by Hoffman's breakthrough performance as by Clifton Collins and Catherine Keener in support. Somewhat deservedly, Hoffman took home the Oscar for this role (I believe Heath Ledger was better). And deservedly, the film didn't win any other awards, as it was good, but not that good.

132. Southland Tales (Richard Kelly, 2007) - It might take a particular type of person to appreciate my listing of this movie here. That particular type might be insane--let me just run down a quick cast summary: The Rock, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Cheri Oteri, Jon Lovitz, Mandy Moore, Seann William Scott (who, by comparison, kills his role), Booger from Revenge of the Nerds--it's almost mind-boggling to create a cast this outright laughable. But Richard Kelly, acclaimed writer/director of Donnie Darko, did it. And I suppose you could say he took his lumps as a result. I like this movie. I don't know why. I think Justin Timberlake carries it from start to finish, and there are plenty of really spectacular shots in it (along with plenty of odd ones, but that's another story). If you watch it, there's a good chance you won't be able (or WANT) to get through it, but all I can say is that I did, and I really wish it would have been more successful than it was. Something about it makes me think that he did it intentionally, but Kelly, please, next time, if you want to make an apocalyptic movie--try to wrangle yourself a little better cast.

131. I Am Legend (Francis Lawrence, 2007) - Speaking of apocalyptic--I Am Legend is bound to sit in a bin with The Road and The Book of Eli and other end of the world, one many journey movies that happen to make a splash towards the end of this decade. And though I haven't seen those other two yet, I can say I was definitely satisfied with I Am Legend. I like Will Smith when he's able to blend his action, comedic, and dramatic talents together, and he's pretty successful at occupying the screen by himself for half a movie. I Am Legend also features just about the coolest dog in the history of movies, German Shepherd Sam, his sidekick and only companion. I saw the "alternate ending" available on DVD, and trust me, the theatrical release was definitely superior.

130. The Matrix Reloaded (Wachowski Brothers, 2003) - Now that there has been a little bit of time for everyone to digest the Matrix trilogy and the value of it, I think it's becoming much more polarizing, since the "wow" of the effects has kind of faded. I personally think the first Matrix movie is phenomenal, and it stands on its own as a fantastic film, regardless of how revolutionary the special effects and fight sequences were. I think they got in a little over their heads with the two follow ups, flooded the screen with CGI and every imaginable camera angle, and lost touch with the neat story facets from the original. But Reloaded is still an enjoyable ride. It features the Keymaker, perhaps my favorite of all Matrix characters, and a lot of intense action while only lightly tapping into prophecy.

129. Up In The Air (Jason Reitman, 2009) - I wrote a formal review of the film here, so you could check that out if you'd like. A few weeks removed from my viewing, I think my take on it remains--it was a good film, certainly well made all around, but just didn't hit all the buttons that you'd really like a "Best Movie of the Year" to hit. I think awards season is treating it appropriately--a few here and there, but not enough to make it really stand out.

128. O Brother, Where Art Thou? (Coen Brothers, 2000) - From recent to throwback, O Brother has been around long enough at this point that many people consider it a classic, something which I can appreciate but maybe not agree with. Bug-eyed comic George Clooney is not really my favorite, I prefer him as much more subtle, but he's not the be-all-end-all of this movie, and I think Tim Blake Nelson is certainly my favorite part. The blend of comedy, adventure, and bluegrass music is pretty novel, at least for me, and it's no surprise that the genius team of Joel and Ethan Coen was at the helm for it. It's not my favorite of their movies, for sure, but it's still head and shoulders above the typical drudge you find in Hollywood.

127. John Q (Nick Cassavetes, 2002) - This was in the midst of what was a really solid stretch of movies for Denzel Washington, including The Hurricane and Training Day, and though it certainly wasn't the most acclaimed of performances by him, I think it might be the most underrated. Superficially, this is a pretty basic studio get together that should make some bank at the box office, but along the way I think they stumbled across a good movie that a lot of people can identify with. Like Dog Day Afternoon, John Q takes a simple person and turns him in to a criminal to help the ones he loves--in this case, John's son who collapses from an oversized heart and can't afford surgery. James Woods and Anne Heche play pretty stellar villains in this, and though the suspense is (at best) tepid, I have very fond memories of first seeing this movie in the theaters, and over time it hasn't gotten any less enjoyable.

126. Eastern Promises (David Cronenberg, 2007) - Lots of people, myself included, had huge hopes for Cronenberg's follow up to A History of Violence, and once again teaming up with Viggo Mortensen (a trend--repeat director/actor pair--that I am kind of getting tired of) and this time featuring Naomi Watts, Eastern Promises has a lot of potential. It turned out to be a pretty wicked film, pulling no punches in terms of intensity (though falling short of A History) and touting a well-conceived story. Unfortunately, my main issue with this movie was that it pulled the plug way too soon--I thought there was still about 20 minutes to go, and boom, it ended. Still, maybe that was a good thing, as it didn't oversaturate you and left you wanting a little bit more. Plus, a naked knife fight. I mean, come on!

And with that, I must disappear.

#033 - Worst Bowl Season Ever?

No question mark. Let's make that one official. I'm not a guru on college bowl season--the fact that there are 34 of them and teams like Minnesota and Marshall and Southern Miss play in them makes it tough to follow. Almost none of them matter to anyone but the schools' athletic directors and coaches on the hot seat, but they get aired on TV, there's tons of hype, and everything eventually leads to a highly-questionable and rarely-entertaining finale: the BCS Championship.

The problems with the BCS itself are numerous and I don't even feel like spouting them off. Every college football fan with BCS beef carries around the same notecard of talking points and reasons why it's total baloney. But this year the BCS took "stinkfest" to a new low.

Just take a look, for a moment, at the results:

1. Rose Bowl - Year in and year out, there is something unimpressive about Ohio State. They win lots of games, they are always highly ranked, but they give off vibes about being unable to beat the elite teams. I never want to see Ohio State in anything. They pooped the bed against Florida. They pooped the bed against LSU. They played the ho-humest of all ho-hums against Texas last year (broken-hearted Texas), and then lost to baby genius Matt Barkley and USC this year. On the flip side, Oregon was the hot pick, with the hot offense, the hot headed running back, and the team that is bound for glory and scoring records next season. I think they came into it as the more enjoyable team, but this game was a yawner. Oregon never gained any traction and lost pretty handily. I think most people, by this time next year, will be asking, "Wait, who played in the Rose Bowl last year?"

2. Sugar Bowl - Florida's talent level: 98. Cincinnati's talent level: 72. Sad, sad rout.

3. Fiesta Bowl - Outside of the fact that this game was low-scoring (despite feature such high-octane offenses), this was the only game that could really keep my interest, probably because I was most intrigued by the teams. But my main gripe is the set-up. I think the BCS blew some chances here, to make things more interesting. Florida is the team that people wanted to play (if they couldn't play in the championship game). Florida is the top of the totem pole. Give either Boise or TCU the shot to play them. I know, in a way, since they were both undefeated it would have been tough to pick, so playing them against each other is a fair solution... but it would only have an effect if it was a playoff system. I believe the BCS didn't want another upset. And some argue "they got better competition this way". Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not saying play these two teams against Iowa or Georgia Tech. But one of them should have gotten the chance at Florida. Probably TCU, as the best non-automatic qualifier. Then Boise would play Iowa (which was the other non-automatic qualifier). And Georgia Tech should have played Cincinnati, since they both won their conferences. All that aside, this game really didn't live up to it's hype. And I think underneath all the manufactured hoopla (generally there's a lot of hoopla involved) BOTH teams probably felt a little sad about the missed opportunity to knock out a big dog.

4. Orange Bowl - Georgia Tech. Iowa. This game couldn't have any less charisma if Bill Belichick did the color commentary. Who even won? (Iowa, I'm pretty sure.)

5. BCS Championship Game - Arguably. Colt McCoy went down like four seconds into regulation. And Alabama won, surprise surprise, forcing five turnovers against a freshman quarterback who got some serious licks in against UTEP and Louisiana-Monroe this season. Maybe you can say that a national championship contender should have a deeper roster, sure, but let's be real, Texas's offense struggled this year, and Colt McCoy to Jordan Shipley was the only thing that produced any real points all season, outside of Hunter Lawrence. The Longhorns were winning with McCoy. And Gilbert may end up being good and he showed some flashes in cutting the deficit to 24-21, but he was born in 1991. Think about that for a second. 1991? I was already smoking a pack a day by then. That makes him a contemporary of Miley Cyrus, and he's supposed to be ready to deliver in a pinch on college football's biggest stage? Sigh. I know injuries happen and they can ruin a national championship at any point, but if I was an Alabama fan, I wouldn't even be satisfied with this result. "Yay, we just beat a freshman quarterback after the Heisman finalist played a handful of snaps." It's deflating all around. I know a playoff wouldn't fix Texas's problem, sure. They lost, if it was a playoff they would still have lost. But at least a plus one gives us the opportunity to see what might be a completely scintillating (or completely stink-bombing) matchup between the two teams left standing--Boise and Bama. (And hopefully Kellen Moore wouldn't stub his toe on the first drive.)

I, for one, would love to see two teams with complete rosters playing full-throttle when the crystal's on the line.

#032 - NFL Regular Season Recap

If you're waiting for the next batch of top movies from the 2000s, then I'm sorry, I'm working on it, but putting one ahead of another at this stage is like splitting hairs with other hairs. But at the same time, I love you, because it means you actually care about what I'm writing here. And let that be the last time I show any emotions here. This is a place for business!

And business we shall discuss.

17 weeks ago, I was much more excited about the upcoming 17 weeks than I am right now. It's sad to see the regular season go, and as pumped as I am about the playoffs, it hurts me just a bit that it'll be another 35 weeks until the 2010 season gets underway, and a whole new rollercoaster ride begins.

None of this stuff might interest you, and you might find it a little bit self-serving, but I'm kind of proud of my performance in football-related activities this season, so you can either take it for what it's worth, or you can close the page and look up "Evil Baby" on YouTube.

Section 1: Fantasy

Everyone's favorite uber-nerd activity. Fantasy Football. Okay, so millions of people play it, including females, and it's becoming less and less nerdy (but in a way, less and less hip) since they always have segments on fantasy advice every night on SportsCenter.

This year, I played in one fantasy league. It was maybe my lowest total ever. I usually participate in a few public leagues to go along with a league with friends, but this year I was a little bit behind the ball and bailed on the publics. What was left? One ESPN.com custom league with 11 other people, only about half of whom I actually know. But people boasted pretty superb knowledge of the game, and though some guys' rooting affiliations came through glaringly during the draft, it turned out to be a pretty decent league.

When the dust settled at the end of the year, The Mad Stork, my team (named after legendary 6' 9" Raider linebacker Ted Hendricks) was the champion after a 6-team, 3-week playoff. I started the year questionably, with some draft picks (Darren McFadden, Calvin Johnson, Anquan Boldin) struggling mightily with performance or injury. After falling to 2-3 and eventually to 4-4, my guys put it together thanks to a key late season pickup of Jamaal Charles and the season-long domination of DeSean Jackson, finishing 8-5, just barely slipping into the playoffs as the 6 seed. But I put up three straight 100+ point games in the playoffs en route to victory, and team depth proved to be the deciding factor. In the championship round, I started only 1 (Anquan Boldin) of my first 4 draft picks (the others being DeAngelo Williams, Calvin Johnson, and Darren McFadden) but I got solid performances out of just about everyone, even though nobody finished with more than 20 points. Then, of course, a week after the season ends, Jamaal Charles decides to run for 260 yards and 2 touchdowns against the Broncos, just for good measure.

Section 2: Confidence Pool

I took part in a season-long confidence pool with 10 of my close friends this year (one of whom I have never met), the first time I've ever done so, and it turned out to be a highly enjoyable experience--one which helps make the games more interesting and builds harmless rivalries.

The concept of a confidence pool, for anyone who doesn't know, is this: each week, you pick the winners of all the games (usually 16, but 14 or 13 during bye weeks) and write them down. Then, you take the numbers 1-16 (or 3-16 during a bye week, depending on the number of games played) and assign each potential winner that many points. You put the highest number of points on the game you're most confident about (like the Colts over the Rams) and the least on the game that's the biggest toss up (like Ravens-Steelers). Then as the games go by, you add up all your points and highest point total wins for the week.

Our pool was a $40 entry fee, $20 to the winner of each week, $60 to the cumulative winner at the end of the season, $30 to cumulative second place, and $10 to cumulative last place. Unfortunately, I only took home one weekly win during the year, in week 5, when Seattle, Atlanta and Cleveland carried me to victory. However, I kept within striking distance of the yearly championship every week, finishing the season with the 10 straight strong weekly performances: 4th, 5th, 2nd, 4th, 2nd, 2nd, 5th, 4th, 2nd, 2nd. Sure, the 2nd places were all quite frustrating, each time I was only a game away from another $20, but eventually I took the overall lead in Week 16 and did well enough Week 17 to secure the season long victory. I had a 174-82 record, which is pretty solid, but not spectacular, as I've seen that the leaders in ESPN.com's Pick'em Straight Up had win totals in the 190s.

Still, I was pretty proud of that win, especially after dealing with the frustration of constantly falling short.

Section 3: ESPN.com's Pigskin Pick'em (Against the Spread)

I got an invite from my friend Mike to participate in the ESPN.com spread pool, which is actually the first time I had ever done it (previously he had invited me to do a pool at his office, which I performed atrociously in). We started out with 8 people in the pool, most of whom were repeat participants from the fantasy league, but after a couple weeks only 4 of us still bothered to enter our picks.

I started out fairly well and was in second place early on, but eventually grabbed the lead about mid-season and didn't look back. As nice as it would have been to put up 12- and 13-point weeks, they were always incredibly hard to achieve and I kept my goal set at going at least .500 each week--which I was able to accomplish fairly consistently, usually scoring an 8 or a 9. Eventually I started to get interest in my site-wide ranking, checking my score each week against the top players in the entire ESPN.com Pigskin Pick'em game, trying to climb a little higher each Sunday. In the end, I finished with 146 points, which translates to a 146-110 record (57%, just good enough by Vegas standards) and my overall ranking was #250--though that was a little disappointing because I had jumped up to #95 before the Bengals got destroyed by the Jets in the season's final game. I've estimated that there were about 200,000 users participating in the game, as ESPN pegged my percentile at 99.8%, a number that I was pretty pleased with.

Section 4: Sportsbook.com's Perfect Parlay

The "Perfect Parlay" (details here) is a pool, quite similar to the ESPN.com pool, where you pick 16 games against the spread every week in hopes of nailing all 16 right and winning $100,000. This was the third year I've participated, though the last two years I had slip-ups where I would forget to turn in picks for a week or two, which completely kills all chances at finishing with a top ranking. This year I was determined to at least turn in picks every week, and I did succeed, and it turned out positively for me.

My goal in years past has been to get into the top 100, which is a list they display every week for the top 100 cumulative entries. I had never succeeded until about Week 13 this year, when I finally broke through after hovering in the 200-300 range for a while. It was nice to see my name up there, though I knew I had no realistic shot at first place, and when all was said and done, I finished with 144 points, in 30th place. Unlike ESPN.com's, I don't have any specific ranking that judges how many people are in the pool, but based on where I finished during weeks that were quite poor, I'd say there were about 4000 people in the pool. Again, I'm pretty pleased with that finish, 30th out of 4000, though admittedly 144 points out of a possible 272 is not that great. One of the differences between ESPN and Sportsbook is that ESPN only uses spreads with half-points (-1.5, -2.5, -7.5) and Sportsbook doesn't necessarily care either way (which can result in pushes/ties). This leads to different spreads on different games, and with the potential for ties (which basically count as a loss on Sportsbook), I ended up doing quite better percentage-wise on ESPN (57%) as compared to Sportsbook (53%).

Section 5: Fiscal

Unfortunately, those successes aside, it wasn't the best year for me on the books. Perhaps I played too conservatively, only betting certain games and not going for a more even distribution, or perhaps I was too greedy, playing too many parlays and teasers. Either way, I ended up just below even, which is a shame, but considering the number of bets I placed over the season, it's pretty good to end up breaking even. And honestly, a decent amount of the final loss I had could be attributed to college football games, which I don't follow as closely and was much less successful on. I know, however, that to deserve any respect, the success that I have to have in these ventures needs to be here, rather than in items that don't carry any weight.

#031 - Top 200 Movies of the Decade (175-151)

To check out numbers 176-200, go here.

I hope everyone had a good Christmas. My Christmas gifts this year included a Criterion Collection edition of Bottle Rocket, with new hand-drawn cover art (a la The Savages). Speaking of The Savages, I'd like to direct your attention to a short post on the best movie posters of the decade, at the following link:

http://www.theauteurs.com/notebook/posts/1327

I don't necessarily agree or disagree with anything they list there. Most of them are pretty solid. But it does seem like an egregious oversight to leave any Joker-related Dark Knight posters off that list.

And in honor of Bottle Rocket, Wes Anderson's first feature, today's portion will include Anderson's first appearance on the countdown.

Let's continue:

175. The Station Agent (Thomas McCarthy, 2003) - A lot of people might say McCarthy's follow up, The Visitor, was better than this, but I haven't seen it. And this is the only movie I've ever seen not to exploit little people, but rather to pose them sympathetically. Peter Dinklage is pretty superb, you try to overlook his physical traits and say, "Hey, this is a normal guy, trying to live a normal life." It's a very well-made film, with a good story by someone who has a fantastic grasp on human relationships.

174. Things We Lost in the Fire (Susanne Bier, 2007) - A movie that clearly sets out to destroy your emotional balance. There are lots of swings in the storyline, ups and downs, where you both cheer for and are sickened by Benicio del Toro's character, a recovering junkie who moves in with his best friend's widow and children. It's a plot designed to make you angry, and it does, only not without tip-toeing along the line between moving and wretched. Grave and not flashy, but very worthwhile. Halle Berry seems to be getting the hang of "broken woman".

173. Star Trek (J.J. Abrams, 2009) - Just the opposite of the previous movie, Star Trek is a completely box office-driven summer spectacle. Chris Pine is spot on as the new Kirk, and Zachary Quinto is characteristically weird as Spock, but it's the full-boil action and sharp dialogue that made this movie entertaining. I'm not particularly a Star Trek fan, but it was good, just so long as they don't beat it to death with a series of fifteen installments.

172. Kinsey (Bill Condon, 2004) - The subject himself made this movie interesting, and surprisingly enough, I find it's been the role most comfortable for Liam Neeson to play. He's a natural. But it's strong performances by Laura Linney and Chris O'Donnell that I think carry this movie from "watchable" to "good". Odd to be saying that about O'Donnell at this point in his career, but I think he should embrace the task of serviceable support, since he never really caught on as a lead.

171. Monsters, Inc. (Peter Docter, 2001) - I think of all the top animated hits of the decade, I think Monsters, Inc. might be the one adults are most embarrassed to admit liking. Possibly because a featured character is a young girl named "Boo". But the cast here is dynamic. I love Goodman and Crystal, and their analogs on screen pop with chemistry. It may not provide the one-liners of Shrek or the visual beauty of Wall-E, but it's a darned fun movie to watch.

170. Seven Pounds (Gabriele Muccino, 2008) - Will Smith and Muccino, back in the act. I'm not even going to list The Pursuit of Happyness here, so it's a nod to the duo that their follow-up effort is improved. Even though this movie might have cheated a little with emotions, I still found it to be compelling and well-done. I remember it having a terrific trailer, and even though it didn't get a lot of critical acclaim, I wasn't disappointed with it at all.

169. High Fidelity (Stephen Frears, 2000) - What better movie to appear on this list than a movie about lists? It's weird to me that a movie written and directed by Englishmen could be so American at heart--a coming of age story about a thirtysomething and his pitfalls in love and his love of rock music. I'm a big John Cusack fan. I think he's solid. And this movie is entertaining and easy to identify with. My favorite Nick Hornby adaptation to date.

168. Broken Flowers (Jim Jarmusch, 2005) - This is Bill Murray in the jaded stage of his career, as I mentioned before with Lost in Translation (#201). And I think he's right on point. He matches well with Jarmusch, a man whose writing has always been sharp and melancholy. Maybe it wasn't the critical success it seemed destined to be, but I thought it was amusing and thoughtful, with particularly entertaining performances by Jeffrey Wright and Mark Webber.

167. Unknown White Male (Rupert Murray, 2005) - Controversial. Period. I believe this is the first documentary on my countdown, though the "document" part of it could be argued, I suppose. It's a story about a guy living in New York who wakes up one day on the subway and has his memory just wiped clean. He doesn't know his name or where he is or what he's doing with his life--and his friend decides to make a documentary about it. Really compelling, but some of the things are so unbelievable it's hard to throw yourself behind the story 100%. Maybe it's a fake, maybe it isn't, but I know that after I got done watching it, I went straight to Google and started looking up as much as I can. It works. It works damned well.

166. Charlie Wilson's War (Mike Nichols, 2007) - An all-star cast including Tom Hanks and director Mike Nichols, and yet, after the initial splash this movie made, it sort of faded away with ease. But Aaron Sorkin's return to the big screen after 10 years of television was really solid. I think timing-wise it was terrific, and even though it wasn't a secret to anybody, relating the Iran/Afghanistan situation to modern day was really enlightening to me, somebody who didn't live through it the first time around. Hanks is a little odd, not his greatest performance. But Philip Seymour Hoffman is absolutely fantastic, proving that he's one of the best in character roles.

165. Old School (Todd Phillips, 2003) - This was the movie that started it all when it comes to the decade of Frat Pack comedies. And I think it still stands up to the rest, because it has both a solid number of laughs and a well-crafted story to keep the momentum rolling between the high points. Unfortunately it was Luke Wilson's last hurrah, it seems, which is a shame because I always liked him. But you know you've already incorporated so many of these lines into your dialect that you probably forget where they came from. He gonna do one!

164. X Men (Bryan Singer, 2000) - A decade that was smothered with comic book movies might never have been if not for this one. It was modern, it was sleek, it was exciting, it was everything that a superhero movie should have been, and the incorporation of the mutants into today's society made it accessible and fresh. As a whole it might have been more flawed than some of the films to follow it, but you have to give credit to the predecessor, and X Men was a definite winner. Just look at Hugh Jackman's career, and try to imagine what it would be without this break.

163. Monster (Patty Jenkins, 2003) - I have a negative bias towards this movie, but that shouldn't take away from how successful it was. Charlize Theron was fascinating, but all of the incredible press she received from this film I thought was a little bit misdirected--her acting was good, but not world-class, she just happened to have a good make up artist. Still, the movie receives plenty of bonus points for the originality of the story (true or not) and the movie-making conventions it socked in the face.

162. A Scanner Darkly (Richard Linklater, 2006) - Linklater has essentially become the master of dialogue, with Before Sunset and Before Sunrise, and now has crowned himself master of rotoscope with this Philip K. Dick adaptation. This film was immensely intriguing from the first preview, and while it didn't hit as many peaks as I would have liked it to, it was still an inventive take on the grisly story. To do it well in live action would have required too much CGI. I give Linklater a lot of credit for releasing an adult-themed animation, definitely the best angle for his interpretation.

161. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter and Spring (Bom yeoreum gaeul gyeoul guerigo bom) (Ki-duk Kim, 2003) - About as tranquil a movie as you can get. Its direction is like a slow interpretive dance, telling the story of a young Korean boy who learns at the feet of a Buddhist monk at a floating temple. It is breathtaking and precise, the kind of movie that leads to a lot of introspection, and leaves you with a lot of respect for the life that the old monk chooses to lead. Certainly not flashy, but a higher level art form.

160. Gone Baby Gone (Ben Affleck, 2007) - It's a surprise to me that I'm ranking a Ben Affleck-directed movie, but alas, here it is. His choice of Casey as the lead, while obvious, was the right one--I personally think Casey is the superior actor, much more relatable to viewers. Again based on a Dennis Lehane novel, this was a pretty natural follow up to Mystic River. Similar themes, similar Boston locations, similar accents. And like Mystic River, it was a gripping story with strong characters, and in this case it was bolstered by Morgan Freeman and a fantastic turn by Amy Ryan as the drug-addicted mess of a mother.

159. Coffee and Cigarettes (Jim Jarmusch, 2003) - Nearly back-to-back appearances by Jarmusch on the countdown, Coffee and Cigarettes is a series of black and white vignettes revolving around the titular cafe items that took some 17 years to put together. My personal favorite scenes include The RZA, The GZA and Bill Murray; Jack and Meg White; and the fantastically funny piece with Alfred Molina and Steve Coogan. If you haven't seen this movie at all, it's worth a view, particularly because you don't even have to watch the whole movie at once, since the scenes are only a few minutes long.

158. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Peter Jackson, 2001) - Yes, it might set the stage for one of the most successful movie trilogies of all time. But it's almost as if they know they have you hooked for the entire ride, so they put little effort into making the first one exciting. Lots of people count this one as their favorite, don't include me in that group. It's beautifully shot and outlines a flood of character arcs, but unfortunately the snooze factor puts it at the bottom of the trio.

157. Hotel Rwanda (Terry George, 2004) - Don Cheadle's chance to shine. He had gone for years as a hailed supporting actor, always turning in strong performances, and Hotel Rwanda gave him the opportunity to lead in a very politically relevant film about the massacres in Rwanda. Unfortunately I don't think it had the gravity that they wanted it to have, perhaps because it seemed to be shot in a detached way, unlike the gritty realism a lot of third world-set films have adopted.

156. The Ring (Gore Verbinski, 2002) - I don't see a lot of horror movies. I much prefer thrillers (like Seven), but I took the bait and saw The Ring on Halloween night when it opened. I don't care what you say, The Ring was the definitive horror movie of the decade, and even set the stage for the slew of creepy kid stories that followed it (the single most abused theme in modern horror). I was scared, for sure, but also impressed. Verbinski does not dedicate himself solely to horror (he did the Pirates movies) and his ability to produce coldly chilling images went a long way in this one.

155. Waking Life (Richard Linklater, 2001) - Linklater again, rotoscope again (or should I say first?). Waking Life is a very abstract story about dreams and the perception of reality. It's a movie people like to talk about afterwards, very thought provoking, his attempt at big screen philosophy. The tale is told vignette style, jumping story to story, which keeps the content fresh and doesn't rely too heavily on one facet.

154. In the Valley of Elah (Paul Haggis, 2007) - Haggis is known as the king screenwriter of the day, but he's not too poor of a director (with this and Crash under his belt). One of the many Iraq-war related movies to come out in recent years, it's shouldered by Tommy Lee Jones in a strong and emotional performance. I think the "military coverup" angle is nearing saturation, but at the very least it sets up a decent amount of intrigue and drama, the backbone this story rests upon.

153. The Darjeeling Limited (Wes Anderson, 2007) - It took me a while, but I finally got there. Wes Anderson's first (of several) appearances here is his latest live-action film, featuring Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody and Jason Schwartzmann as three brothers traveling India by train after the death of their father. As he gets older, I think Anderson's movies get more poignant and introspective, but they lose a little bit of the sharp wit and creativity he's made his name on. It's still a good movie, don't get me wrong, but I do believe I was disappointed with it, the first time I think I can so say about one of his films. There's still hope he returns to form (and I have yet to see The Fantastic Mr. Fox).

152. Walk the Line (James Mangold, 2005) - For someone who is, at least to the general public, a relative no-name, James Mangold has made a surprising number of appearances on my list. Joaquin Phoenix was superb, in my estimation, which makes his decision to go insane and quit acting all the more unbelievable. But at least he produced this movie, which I think sensationalizes Johnny Cash's life a little much, nudging it a bit from expository towards entertaining. Phoenix's singing, though, is uncanny.

151. Millions (Danny Boyle, 2004) - Supposedly a fantastical family movie, Millions is actually a smart picture that anyone can appreciate, regardless of age. Seemingly an odd follow-up to 28 Days Later, Millions tells the story of an unpopular and imaginative boy (Alex Etel) who finds an enormous bag full of money while playing near the train tracks outside his family home. The concept is well-devised, situated around the transfer of Pounds to Euros and how the boy and his family play modern-day Robin Hood for a short time. It's a pretty moving story about togetherness, with or without the magical realism of miracles. Well done and hits on a lot of points you might not expect for a "family" film.

Well. There you have them. #175-151. Nothing too sensational, with the exception perhaps of Lord of the Rings. If you haven't seen some of the movies I've listed here and are the least interested, I definitely suggest checking them out.

It's taking me a while to rank these, but hopefully I'll get #150-126 out soon, before the decade really is over.

#030 - Top 200 Movies of the Decade (200-176)

Before I get started, I think I need to clarify a few things.

A) I have not seen every single movie this decade. I haven't even seen Inglorious Basterds. And while Jon might not understand how that's possible, it's true. Other sites out there, other critics, have seen way more movies than I have this decade, and can make a more comprehensive list than I can.

B) As a follow up, I'd like to apologize to Sherlock Holmes, which hasn't come out yet. And Avatar, which I haven't seen (but don't think looks that good anyway). And any other movie that has yet to open that might end up being fantastic. And Amelie, which I still have yet to see (and I know this is considered a crime by many). And Gangs of New York. So if there's a movie that seems like it should be an OBVIOUS addition to the list, but you don't see it, chances are I just haven't seen it yet. Or maybe I have seen it, and I just didn't think it was that great.

C) I haven't seen any Harry Potter movies, so don't get your panties in a bunch if you don't see them here. I also haven't seen any of the new Star Wars movies (I - III).

D) While some awards, like the Golden Globes (and to an extent, the Oscars) don't like to group all different kinds of movies together, I do. So this list does not exclude animated movies, documentaries, foreign movies, or, you know, "comic book movies which don't deserve Oscars". They're all in here. Though I suppose I don't include any shorts. So forgive me for that.

E) I've found it to be exceedingly hard to rank these movies. I built a program to help me out with this task, but that can only go so far. As such, this list is a generalization. Movies that find themselves in certain groups (ie Top 20) do belong in that group. But along the way, given how difficult the challenge is, I might have an instance where I flip flop on say, #123 and #124, and can't decide which I really like better. If you think it's easier than I'm making it out to be, try doing it sometime.

F) I'm open to discussion (argument). In fact, I think that's the whole purpose of doing these lists. To incite argument.

Here goes:

Honorable Mention:

205. Off the Black (James Ponsoldt, 2005)

204. Best In Show (Christopher Guest, 2000)

203. The Shape of Things (Neil LaBute, 2003)

202. Asylum (David Mackenzie, 2005)

201. Venus (Roger Michell, 2006)

200. Radio (Michael Tollin, 2003) - I don't think I've heard of anyone who dislikes this movie. It was a pretty touching story, well done, even if it didn't do anything new. A good family film.

199. Wendy and Lucy (Kelly Reichardt, 2008) - Compared to what some critics thought of this movie, this is a poor ranking for it. I thought it was good, I thought Michelle Williams was believable and strong in this performance, but it wasn't really the epic breakthrough I think many people claimed it was. A quaint little story, but not enough happened for it to really be worth a second view.

198. The History Boys (Nicholas Hytner, 2006) - A good English film adapted from a stage play. Probably a who's who of young British actors, but since we don't live there, they're not all that recognizable. I thought the students' character definitions were too loose, but a terrific performance by the boys' primary teacher, Hector (Richard Griffiths).

197. A Mighty Wind (Christopher Guest, 2003) - Already the second Guest movie to appear here. It was clever and amusing, but for me rarely laugh-out-loud funny. I know some people really love this movie--and his movies in general--but I guess it's just not my totally my thing.

196. Notes on a Scandal (Richard Eyre, 2006) - I have to admit. I actually had this ranked higher, but at the last second, moved it down a little, particularly because I realized that, while well executed and well acted, there wasn't that much memorable about the film (other than Phillip Glass's score). Judi Dench is creepy and sad, Cate Blanchett is solid (but a little bit unbelievable). Well-deserving of it's nominations, but rightly so did not win.

195. Bad Guy (Nabbeun Namja) (Ki-duk Kim, 2001) - Korean movie with a well crafted story, and nicely shot. I had some issues with the main character, a mute and borderline abusive hero/anti-hero, but overall it didn't take away from the concept of the film. Certainly interesting.

194. Rudo y Cursi (Carlos Cuaron, 2008) - First film by Alfonso's brother to make a splash in the US, pairing Gael Garcia Bernal and Diego Luna again, this time as brothers and competing soccer stars. It was obvious that they were lacking in functional soccer choreography, but the on-field action wasn't really the main focus of the story anyway. It was a good character-driven piece that made you feel both sympathy and disdain for the two brothers.

193. Ghost World (Terry Zwigoff, 2000) - This is the weird comic book movie that seems nothing like a comic book that will probably be best known for introducing Scarlett Johansson as a young woman. Buscemi really carries this movie. Unfortunately he's kind of perfect to play a loner, or a bit of a creep.

192. Remember the Titans (Boaz Yakin, 2000) - Denzel Washington's first appearance of many on this countdown. All around good movie, I don't think there are many people out there who would argue with it. I think some people might consider Friday Night Lights to have surpassed in, in terms of a football movie, but I disagree. Maybe the action on the field was more realistic and updated, but I like the story of Titans a lot--even if it seems like a too pleasant imagining of racial relationships in the South at the time.

191. Lost In Translation (Sofia Coppola, 2003) - I think by this rank you can tell I didn't love this movie as much as some other people did. My dad actually walked out of it halfway through (I guess it wasn't his take on a "Bill Murray movie") and I have to believe for a lot of people it didn't match the long-established image of Murray. But I think it did open the door to the new Murray--even drier, angsty, and introspective. And the interaction with the Tokyo landscape was phenomenal.

190. Napoleon Dynamite (Jared Hess, 2004) - Admit it, Napoleon Dynamite was huge when it came out. Everyone was doing the "gosh" thing, asking for chapstick, and saying "Your mom goes to college." It was an oddity for the time, when comedies were trying to up the ante by being raunchier and more exploitative, Dynamite comes along and flips the convention on it's head. It seems like it was written by twelve year olds, and maybe that's why it was so funny--because everyone could appreciate the simplicity of the humor.

189. Mean Creek (Jacob Aaron Estes, 2004) - Uncomfortable. It's hard to watch this movie and not feel uncomfortable the whole way through. You just know bad things are going to happen. And eventually they do. And it seems like one of those easily preventable situations. You want to jump in and tell these kids to stop being so cruel and petty, but in the end, they're kids, and that's what they do. Josh Peck was too perfect for the role of needling fat kid George, and even he probably looks back and feels a little bit sad for himself at that age.

188. Tape (Richard Linklater, 2001) - Linklater has pretty much established himself as the guy who can make movies about people sitting around talking. And Tape is a great example of this. The whole movie takes place inside one room, with only three characters, and you learn so much and feel so much disgust for them throughout the course of the movie that they become real. Ethan Hawke at his sickest and most reprehensible.

187. Ice Age (Chris Wedge, 2002) - Come on. Everyone likes this movie. It's fun, it's funny, and that little squirrel who runs around is pretty much everyone's favorite character. It wasn't ground breaking by any means, but it has a good story that keeps your attention, clever sequences, and nice life lessons for both children and adults. What's not to like?

186. Confessions of a Dangerous Mind (George Clooney, 2002) - Every nice life lesson from Ice Age is probably undone by this movie. About TV producer Chuck Barris's supposed "secret life as a CIA agent", it's vulgar, filthy, and questionable, which of course means it's a great time. Funny and not poorly constructed, Clooney's first directorial feature was memorable. But most of the credit here would go to Charlie Kaufman's writing and Sam Rockwell's spot-on performance.

185. Bread and Roses (Ken Loach, 2000) - I saw this as part of a class which focused on Ken Loach and his experimental realism. It stars Adrien Brody before he was Adrien Brody, and a bunch of no-name Latin American actors as immigrant janitorial workers trying to unionize in a large Los Angeles office building. It is especially notable for a powerful scene between two struggling sisters, arguing over the difficulties they've faced making it in America, and for the strong performances by actors who had little to no previous screen experience. And turns out Brody was pretty solid even as a normal guy, and not an eccentric.

184. Boiler Room (Ben Younger, 2000) - It comes off as a complete vanity piece, with little to no redeeming value, but I really enjoy this movie. I think Giovanni Ribisi is a really polarizing actor--with more people falling on the side of "dislike"--but he seems well-fit for his role as a naive stock broker in a too-good-to-be-true company. The overloaded machismo fits a lot of the name actors, despite their relatively small roles, and in light of recent Ponzi scheme scandals, the concept takes on devilish new layers.

183. For Your Consideration (Christopher Guest, 2006) - Again, another Guest piece. I thought this was the strongest of them, quite amusing and very on-point in regards to the way actors treat potential Oscar consideration. It seemed the most realistic of the mockumentaries, even though it's getting a little difficult to separate all the same recurring actors from their supposed characters.

182. Antwone Fisher (Denzel Washington, 2002) - Hailed as Denzel's directorial debut, and Derek Luke's coming out party. It ended up being one of Denzel's weaker acting jobs, perhaps because he was splitting his time so thin, but Derek Luke was pretty impressive, and the story is sympathetic. Pretty painful scenes when he returns to confront his family.

181. Igby Goes Down (Burr Steers, 2002) - One of the many coming-of-age indie stories throughout the decade that sported a mixed bag of casting decisions and characters who "just want to be normal". It kind of makes you think that writers and artists out there all come from fractured childhoods and just want to be loved and mothered. But at least this one was entertaining. I think a lot of people thought Keiran Culkin was going to explode after this movie, but surprisingly he hasn't been in a whole lot since. Goldblum is enjoyable, as always.

180. House of Sand and Fog (Vadim Perelman, 2003) - This movie came out with a lot of hype, a good cast (Ben Kingsley, Jennifer Connelly), but it kind of got lost in the shuffle after it left theaters, popping back up thanks to Shohreh Aghdashloo's deserved end-of-year kudos. It's a really emotional movie, though in some situations I think they're trying too hard to make it that way. In the end you just find yourself feeling bad for all the characters.

179. District B13 (Banlieue 13) (Pierre Morel, 2004) - A French film that leaned heavily on parkour and the acrobatic martial arts of its actors, one of the very few non-Asian films that used real stunts in an impressive manner. The story was pretty solid, featuring a dystopian future Paris (of the year 2010... something tells me it won't end up looking like this next year) that has closed off District B13 and all its criminals and miscreants. It's pleasantly short enough (84 mins) to keep the action rolling and intensity up without overwhelming you.

178. Anchorman (Adam McKay, 2004) - I found it tough to rank the top comedies of the decade, including Anchorman, which for about six months dominated movie quoting and provided ample rewatchability. Even now the one-liners still work, despite being circulated for five years. Will Ferrell at his odd best, actually playing a character (albeit a relatively thin one) instead of Will-Ferrell-as-obscure-athlete-du-jour.

177. Finding Forrester (Gus Van Sant, 2000) - Look, I'll admit it. It's almost impossible to separate this movie from the now infamous "You're the man now, dog" line that has permeated the internet as ytmnd.com. But I like this movie. It has a kind of bizarre cast--Anna Paquin, Michael Pitt, no-name Rob Brown, Sean Connery, Busta Rhymes--but I like the overachiever storyline and it's interesting to see Connery play a vulnerable old man instead of a ruthless hero like he almost always is. It may have a ridiculously outdated take on urban culture, but it's a good movie. I love the scene where Jamal explains the history of the BMW logo, "but you probably already knew that."

176. The King (James Marsh, 2005) - A peculiar movie that opened to little fanfare starring Gael Garcia Bernal as a decommissioned soldier and William Hurt as his long-lost father, who completely disowns him on sight. The story is a bit twisted, as Elvis (Bernal) tries and tries to win the favor of David (Hurt), alternating between sweet sincere attempts and questionable, sometimes violent outbursts. The role seemed a bit of a challenge for Bernal, and I think he succeeded, though not quite as well as he has in other films. It's a film that's worth seeing, even if you have a hard time accepting the events of the plot.

I'll try to post #175-151 as soon as I can.

Merry Christmas, everyone. Or if you don't celebrate, I'd still like it if you enjoy your day.

#029 - Up In The Air (2009)

Director: Jason Reitman

Writer: Jason Reitman & Sheldon Turner (from a book by Walter Kirn)

Runtime: 109 min.

George Clooney has mastered charm and detachedness. Bruce Wayne, Danny Ocean, Archie Gates, Michael Clayton. They all ran with Clooney's signature suave, the type of guy who you would think has a lot of good friends but not a best friend, has all the women in the world but doesn't love any, and likely doesn't even have any brothers, sisters, or parents that still check in on him. That's his character. He's like a bionic social tiger, preying on the weak, stalking his way to the top of the status ladder without breaking a sweat. He's been doing it for years. So who better to play Ryan Bingham, Up In The Air's leading man, who takes these concepts and turns them into craft. He's a little like T-1000. Incredibly successful, a shapeshifter who can be convincing in any environment, but in the end he's vulnerable to some very simple weaknesses. Oh, and neither is exactly the type to attract friends.

Ryan fires people for a living. He does it well. He's kind, gentle, professional. But his boss (Jason Bateman, who doesn't even attempt a joke, not one) wants to give some of the reins over to snappy little college grad Natalie (Anna Kendrick), who has sort of a modern steamroll approach to firing. Impersonal. Bingham balks. So the highers-up decide that he's going to take her on the road and show her the ropes. And thus, we have a storyline. So Ryan gives her the grand tour, a life which she finds to be more or less pathetic and sad. No friends, no emotions, no love. Her criticism is actually kind of odd, since her character professional is so robotic and rigid, but maybe that's the point. Underneath the other parts of the story, the theme is basic--two characters teaching each other lessons. He teaches her how to be more compassionate and sympathetic in the working world, she teaches him how to open himself up to interpersonal relationships. Which he does, with his fly-by-night, layover-lay of a girlfriend, Alex (Vera Farmiga, about as stunning and charming as she's ever been). After the midway point, the characters take their lessons and apply them, Ryan pursuing love, and Natalie pursuing new career approaches.

I apologize if that sentence was a little sterile or uninspired. I wanted to give a little run through about the storyline of the film, without being too specific or too bland, and without revealing too many details. Really I think the film was well made. The most outstanding parts to me were the interviews, the firings, the short sequences where Ryan and Natalie would sit face-to-face (or computer-to-computer) with the employees and let them go. They were quite touching, seemed to be very much based on empirical observation. And the progression of the story was executed almost flawlessly. It wasn't too fast or too slow, didn't jump around, it was easy to follow from start to finish.

But there's something about the movie that's making me view it, perhaps unfairly, with a negative bias.

It's already mid-December, and the Golden Globe nominees are being announced, and it's struck me during the process of writing this review that, really, this is the best that we have to offer so far? A middle of the road dramedy, well acted and well written that hits on its notes, but doesn't have a ton of re-watchability, and doesn't leave an overwhelming lasting impression (aside from the closing credits song choice--fantastic)? It's disappointing. In years past, we had films like There Will Be Blood have to take a close second to No Country For Old Men in every category, even though in any other year it would have been good enough to win the Oscar. We had films like The Dark Knight not even receive a nomination, because the Academy is too narrow-focused to include such "popcorn fodder" in its prestigious ceremony (oh, my bad, I forgot Christopher Nolan = Michael Bay). Brokeback Mountain didn't win. Babel, The Pianist, Traffic. All runners-up. The Prestige wasn't even nominated (crime of the century--hmm, the Academy just hates Nolan). Neither were Requiem for a Dream, Fight Club, Eternal Sunshine for the Spotless Mind. Recent history is littered with films that were overlooked on Oscar ballots. This year, even though it's not completely over, it seems as if there's no discretion, and every moderately successful film is thrown into the spotlight as a potential Best Picture contender. Was Up in the Air a good movie? Certainly. It was well done, and certainly a step up on the "serious movie" scale for Jason Reitman, who tasted a bit of Oscar seasoning with Juno. But was it the best movie of the year? I don't know. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. But it reinforces the fact that "movie of the year" is intensely subjective, both in taste and time frame. This year was likely hit hard by last year's writer's strike (or at least I can tell myself that to make up for the lack of quality), but that doesn't overshadow the fact that sometimes Best Picture winners come in the back door, instead of fighting their way through the front. Personally, I'll let time be the judge, and not Academy voters who can usually only see as far back as November (except for you, Crash!).

That's not to say I'm discouraging you from seeing this movie. I really did enjoy it, and it had enough funny and emotional parts to satisfy both needs, so do yourself a favor and check it out. But when you're done checking it out, come back and tell me if you think it was truly the year's best--or if you think it could contend with some of those famous snubs I listed above.

#028 - NEXT Cops Out

ESPN the Magazine's NEXT issue has been released. And as soon as I got a good look at the first two candidates, I knew that they had gone soft on their "bold" predictions--the top of the list looks more like NOW than NEXT. Here's a run down:

1. Kevin Durant, F, Oklahoma City Thunder

2. Chris Johnson, RB, Tennessee Titans

3. John Wall, G, Kentucky Wildcats

4. Stephen Strasburg, P, Washington Nationals

5. Melanie Oudin, Women's Tennis

6. Giuseppe Rossi, F, Italy/Villareal

7. Darrelle Revis, CB, New York Jets

8. Ndamukong Suh, DE, Nebraska Cornhuskers

9. Gordon Beckham, SS, Chicago White Sox

10. Bobby Ryan, RW, Anaheim Ducks

11. Jake Locker, QB, Washington Huskies

12. Jason Heyward, OF, Atlanta Braves

13. Australian National Soccer Team

14. Simona De Silvestro, Car Racing

15. JR Celski, Speed Skating

16. Derrick Favors, F, Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets

17. Rory McIlroy, Men's Golf

18. Juan Martin Del Potro, Men's Tennis

19. Ellery Hollingsworth, Snowboarding

20. Arthur Jones, DT, Syracuse Orangemen

20. Chandler Jones, DE, Syracuse Orangemen

20. Jon Jones, MMA

Scanning down the list, certainly there were some names I had never seen before--Rossi, for instance (I may be a little ignorant on soccer, especially individual players), Celski (speed skating, really?) and Hollingsworth (Shaun White is as far as I go). But if there are names you don't recognize, it's likely because they play a sport you don't really care about. If you do care about it, you're likely to know them--and with today's snap judgment media tidal waves, you probably are already sick of hearing how great they will be.

Kevin Durant? Seriously? He's NEXT? Last I checked (which was five seconds ago) he was 4th in the NBA in scoring at 27.7 points per game. And this is not even new. Last year, he averaged 25.3 points per game. And before that, 20.3 as a 19-year old rookie. So what exactly does it mean to be NEXT for him? 40 points a game? He's already in the NBA, against the world's greatest players, and he's damned well holding his own.

The same can be said for Chris Johnson. If you have seen any football this year--or at the least any fantasy football--you know about this guy. Oh, and you knew about him LAST year, when he rushed for 1228 yards and 9 scores in 15 games for a division-winning Titans team. THIS year, he's leading the league in rushing--1396 yards and 9 touchdowns, despite his team's 0-6 start and having to play in games like the 59-0 loss to New England. Steven Jackson is second in the league in rushing with 1120 yards. That's right. 276 yards behind. Through 11 games. Johnson's not just leading the league, he's running circles around it. He has 312 more yards than Adrian Peterson (THE Adrian Peterson) despite 13 less carries--though he certainly could have MORE carries if he didn't always run 80 yards when he touches the ball.

As for Wall? He's been everyone's favorite college cover boy for about a year and a half. Where will he go? (Kentucky) How long will he stay? (One year) Why does he dunk so hard? (The shoes). He's already got the reputation as being "the" guy. So what news is it to announce him as NEXT?

And Darrelle Revis? I think he should be downright offended by his positioning. #7 on this list, even though there have been articles out about him being the best cover corner in the NFL since October? If you're a cornerback, and people say you're the best cornerback, where is there to go from there? I'm confused. (Deion: "The Yankees." Champ: "Offense." Nnamdi: "A real team.") Revis might have been a worthy candidate last year, or maybe two years ago, but at this stage, it's barely even useful to list him there.

I just think they've gotten flat with their coverage. They work all year, scouting, talking to people, interviewing players, coaches, those in the know, trying to find who the coming year's (and years') huge stars are going to be--but most of the time, they cop out. No-brainers. It doesn't do a whole lot to put a guy on the cover with the word "NEXT" underneath him when he's already been on tons of covers. They're not making a whole lot of noise--and even worse, they have no upside to their selections. When people look back on their previous "NEXT" picks, they either look foolish (Kazuo Matsui? I mean, yeah, he's okay... but...) or they were such obvious, beat-you-over-the-head choices that the only likely response is "Yeah but everyone knew that" (LeBron James, Patrick Willis, Dwight Howard). By digging deeper, finding some hidden gems that nobody knows about, you open up a whole bunch of new possibilities--either the players hit it big, which gains instant credibility ("We saw him first") and sheds a little more about what makes him go. Or, the flip side, the athlete crashes and burns, which also leads to a more lasting legacy, in the Brien Taylor or Ryan Leaf mold, with the potential for a one-hour special down the road investigating the failures of these once-promising yearlings. Either way, you're adding a little bit more fuel to the fire than making these easy, hand-delivered picks. Their list might make a little more sense in a wide-purpose publication, like the New York Times, or on 60 Minutes, or an antiquated website like CNNSi. But ESPN should consider its user base, and also the fact that the article is only privy to online Insider subscribers, a set of readers (like myself) who probably check in more than once a year, and have already been inundated with coverage on these athletes.

But I do love me some Kevin Durant, so...