2009: The Apocalypse Came 3 Years Early

Jest though I may about the prophetic predictions of 2012, one has to admit, it is staggering the number of films focused on the end of the world, or some other science-fiction related event which have sprung up in the last few years (well, really, this year). Well, all right, it's not just the apocalypse, and it's not just science-fiction--2009 has proven to be a truly revolutionary year for science fiction, fantasy, and horror. And of course, disaster.

I think it was around late August when I began to adopt a very bleak outlook on the year's list of movies--I had little hope for the late-year entries and there were only a handful of (admittedly amazing) high quality movies from the summer. However, that was before I was assaulted by the year's horror trifecta--I missed Drag Me to Hell in theatres, so I was treated to it on DVD not long ago. Bizarre as it is, I enjoyed every minute. Alison Lohman is beautiful as ever and of course she has a very good performance, and the overarching themes of the movie were quite staggering on certain levels of interpretation. (I'm fascinated by someone's idea that the entire movie is an allegory for Lohman's character struggling with anorexia.)

Next was Paranormal Activity--the best low-budget movie which became the most overrated low budget movie is actually really, really good. I had the convenience of seeing it before it was in fashion to call it overrated--I saw it with a bona-fide terrified audience, and rarely do I ever have so much fun in a theatre. The simple tactics work beautifully and kept me extraordinarily entertained. I can say comfortably that I loved it and was pretty scared by it.

The third film in the trilogy was quite possibly the best, and it never actually reached the big screen: "Trick r Treat" is probably the most underrated movie of the year purely because even the studio deemed it unworthy of national attention, when really it's a fantastic and really fun gem. It's essentially an anthology film, four stories presented one after the other, each getting more and more amusingly disturbing. With all of these great horror movies, it was quite the year for Halloween enthusiasts.

2009 was also an amazing year for anyone remotely interested in sci-fi. There was a barrage of great sci-fi pics during the summer, ranging from entertaining popcorn (Wolverine, Terminator) to really great, well-crafted works (Star Trek) to by far the best (so far at least), District 9. As I write this I realize that it has also been a year for small, low-budget pictures from new directors; District 9 is the epitome of that, taking a little and making it absolutely astounding. Vikus's character journey and the sheer terror which he encounters along the way is one of the best I've seen committed to film in a long time, and District 9 remains my second favorite film of the year so far.

While my outlook on the fantasy entries of the year is a tad more limited, that's largely because the central one (The Lovely Bones) is not yet available for my viewing, but I certainly expect that to be a major force in the genre. Also in the field was the sixth Harry Potter film, which (as I said in my review) was the best of the series so far. Up was one of Pixar's best, arguably a fantasy of the most rudimentary kind, as an old man paired with an upward-gazing boy grace the skies in the way only impeccable animation can deliver.

And of course, there's 2012, which I really loved, despite the fact that as far as film quality goes it's not that high up there. It's just one of those movies I enjoyed the hell out of. Somehow all that destruction was just so fun to watch.

All of this does not even mention Avatar, set to arrive in a couple of weeks, and that is to be the major tour de force of all of these genre films--if it is as revolutionary as has been said, 2009 will go down in history (at least for me) as one of the biggest years ever for this kind of movie.

The Long and Winding "Road"

"The Road" was an extraordinarily well-received book which I did not read; however, I know several people who did read it and were madly in love with it. Consequently I was expecting "The Road" to be a film well worth seeing--perhaps a masterpiece. It has received generally positive reviews, and raves for Viggo Mortensen's performance.

Happily I can say that Viggo delivers enormously, and that his performance is excellent. Not so happily, I must admit that I found the movie to be completely and totally insubstantial. That may sound like an odd criticism, but it's really my main fault with the thing: the performances are very good, the production values are high quality, the music quite pretty. My chief problem lies with the script.

As I said I have not read Cormac McCarthy's novel, but I have heard that the script's presentation of the story was very askew with respect to the source material. This does not surprise me, as the truth is, I found that not much really happens in the movie. It all seems like a trailer--a preview of the movie in full. Dialogue makes vague implications left and right, and we are never really apprised of what anyone is trying to say. There are not so much plot events as anecdotes; little stories about what happened when a dad and his son were travelling down a road during the apocalypse.

Ultimately the script suffers from the same emaciation which plagues the man and his son; ambiguity is taken to such a degree that we never really know if anyone is trying to say anything with this movie. The characters are mere outlines of truly fleshed out human beings. The characters ask what is happening, and there are significant looks between them during which there seems to be communication to indicate frightening or disturbing events, the nature of which we are very rarely apprised. The relationship between the father and son is developed largely through these significant glances, and thus the entire movie the audience (or at least this audience member) feels as though they are not nearly as aware of what is going on as the characters do; a kind of reverse dramatic irony. Personally, I did not enjoy being the subject of this irony.

Ultimately I think I have identified the problem: this book was not meant to be cinematized. It's like trying to adapt Catcher in the Rye; it's pointless. Some things are meant to be absorbed from the page, some from the screen, and some both. I believe The Road is one which should have been left to the reader to consume. Books, which can be digested over a long period, have the luxury of being entirely ambiguous and developing characters almost completely without dialogue; when you make such a book into a film, it seems rather like watching a foreign film without subtitles. There may have been any number of utterly fascinating (or more importantly, affecting) things going on, but I will never know. As it is, it is a relatively interesting film worth perhaps a passing glance for the relationship between father and son, and Viggo Mortensen's performance.