2006 at the Movies Part V: Revisits and Revisions

Part of: Movie Recap

After sitting with my lists for a little while and seeing a few more 2006 films, I have gone back and made a few revisions to the list. Among the affected lists are Best Score, Best Supporting Actor, Best Actress, and Best Picture. What you are about to read are my previously issued lists, revised to include the new entrants, along with notes of what the changes were. The comments for the films and performers that are still on the list are the same as before, but it is worth refreshing yourself with some of the year's best. Read on.

1. Children of Men. The most recent film that I saw for the year is also the greatest. Watching this was a transcendent experience. Alfonso Cuaron has crafted a film of high technical achievement that brings religious and political concepts together in a drama that is gripping and involving on a visceral and emotional level. It is a science fiction film that is not confined by the genre, less occupied with explaining the situation as it is with letting the situation speak for itself and deliver characters that are mired within its confines. This is a powerful movie that delivers the goods and hits all the right notes — from the performances, to the cinematography, to the script, to the score, everything is just right.

2. Pan's Labyrinth. Guillermo del Toro's fantasy film is absolutely amazing. He masterfully intertwines a young girl's fantasy and reality into one beautiful yet deadly tapestry. It is the story of Ofelia, a girl who needs to be protector to her pregnant mother in the face of her sadistic stepfather, who is the captain of a garrison whose purpose is to wipe out the remaining rebels at the end of the Spanish Civil War. This is a truly original and completely breathtaking vision that pays off visually and narratively. It is open to interpretation and can be taken a number of different ways.

3. The Departed. Martin Scorsese’s latest masterpiece is a remake, and an expansion on, the Hong Kong film Infernal Affairs. The original film is a thrilling game of cat and mouse, a game which Scorsese has taken, with screenwriter William Monahan, and upped the ante in its conversion to a tale of the mob in Boston, a film that is alternately hilarious and edge-of-your-seat thrilling. The ensemble cast carries the drama of the setup, with Jack Nicholson chewing scenery as the larger than life crime boss. This is another movie that delivers deadly serious entertainment in a fast paced and involving way. This could possibly lead to Scorsese’s first Best Director Oscar.

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for chris-beaumont

Article Author: Chris Beaumont

Christopher Beaumont spends much of his time writing about music and movies when he isn't indulging in them. He is always ready to talk about his favorite form of entertainment and offer up recommendations. Follow: Twitter and Tumblr. Visit: Critical Outcast. …

Visit Chris Beaumont's author pageChris Beaumont's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own

Article comments

  • 1 - Ty

    Feb 07, 2007 at 6:06 pm

    "Meryl Streep, The Devil Wears Prada. Deliciously evil, Streep gives a wonderful performance here, showing us all that it is possible to mold someone into what they do not wish to be without their knowledge. Quite subversive."

    Doesn't it bother you that Meryl Streep is up for BEST ACTRESS???

    It bothers me very much. THE LEAD ACTRESS IN THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA IS ANNE HATHAWAY. Streep is in a SUPPORTING role, but somehow she is up for Best Actress.

    That makes NO sense to me at all.

    The same argument (but not nearly as strong) could be said for Forrest Whittaker. The lead is the Scottish Doctor, not Idi Amin. Whittaker is also in a supporting role, but at least most of the movie revolves around him.

    In the Devil Wears Prada, the movie revolves around Hathaway, NOT Streep. And Streep is not in the lead position, just a supporting role.

    The Academy is pathetic in nominating her for Best Actress just because they don't want to bump someone off the Best Supporting Actress list. She is either get the nom for that or nothing, her being nominated for Best Actress for DWP is ridiculous.

  • 2 - El Bicho

    Feb 07, 2007 at 6:49 pm

    "Babel and Blood Diamond were knocked off the list in favor of Pan's Labyrinth and Letters from Iwo Jima...V for Vendetta held their position."

    Huh?! This doesn't make any sense to me. If "Babel" was Number 7 before, wouldn't seeing two films that were better move it down to 9 rather than, at best, 11? It's as if seeing those two better films also made "V for..." better than "Babel" and "Blood Diamond" as well. Please clarify.

    Ty - "That makes NO sense to me at all."

    You appear to not understand the process. The film's producers submit to the different categories, and in these instances it's most likely contractual obligations that forced their hands. The Academy, and its nominating committees then nominate from the pool they are given rather than choosing on their own.

    It happens all the time because the stars want to compete for the bigger awards. I've seen it where films that have absolutely bombed at the box office have had to submit actors for Oscars.

  • 3 - Chris Beaumont

    Feb 07, 2007 at 10:22 pm

    My top ten list has been a fluid beast. There is a possibility it could change again in time. Although, for all intents and purposes this is the final one. Opinions of film can change and it can be hard to directly compare one to another.

    My original list was actually a little different than the one that appeared in my initial list here. My original list can be seen here.
    In that version Babel was number 10 and Blood Diamond 8. When I sat down to make my list that first appeared here, it rose a bit. Then upon further reflection and a couple of films, my opinion changed and that resulted in this list here.

  • 4 - Ty

    Feb 08, 2007 at 3:24 pm

    "You appear to not understand the process. The film's producers submit to the different categories, and in these instances it's most likely contractual obligations that forced their hands. The Academy, and its nominating committees then nominate from the pool they are given rather than choosing on their own.

    It happens all the time because the stars want to compete for the bigger awards. I've seen it where films that have absolutely bombed at the box office have had to submit actors for Oscars."

    You apparently don't understand that the Academy is a bunch of idiots then since Meryl Streep was not the lead actress she should be INELIGIBLE for Best Actrees.

  • 5 - El Bicho

    Feb 11, 2007 at 2:36 pm

    "Then upon further reflection and a couple of films, my opinion changed and that resulted in this list here."

    This is what happened, which was obvious. It's the "further reflection", the why, that would have readers curious.

    Ty, award shows are nothing more than infomercials, but feel free to write your congressman if this travesty of justice is so impossible to live with.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Dec 01, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for November

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs