For me, 2017 was a matter of finally seeing the work of Peter Watkins (which I will continue to do in early 2018), as well as of Ermanno Olmi (in 2018 I will continue this by seeing The Tree of Wooden Clogs) and Straub and Huillet (in 2018 I will continue this by seeing Antigone). It was also the continuation of the process of discovering the work of Sion Sono (in 2018 I will continue this by seeing The Whispering Star and Antiporno), as well as catching up with major works of Yasujiro Ozu that I had not seen previously, and an ongoing exploration of Japanese cinema in general (which will continue in 2018).
2017 SUMMARY
New films watched during 2017: 166 films. Average tier: 5.73 (average tier in 2016 was 5.25 from 130 rankings; in 2015, 5.48 from 164 rankings; in 2014, 4.67 from 216 rankings; in 2013, 5.08 from 301 rankings; in 2012, 4.97 from 237 rankings; in 2011, 4.96 from 237 rankings; in 2010, 5.22 from 330 rankings). So 2017 had the highest average tier of any year in the last eight years, and by a fair margin too.
Masterpieces (scores between 91 and 100) watched in 2017: 2 films. They are: Edvard Munch (Patrick Watkins, 1974); Perceval le Gallois (Eric Rohmer, 1978). The score of 94 for Edvard Munch represents the second highest score I have given to any film I have watched in the period since I joined Criticker in 2006 (the highest being a score of 95 for The Young Girls of Rochefort, which I watched in January 2012).
Tier 10 in 2017: 11 films. They are Edvard Munch (94), Perceval le Gallois (91), La Cotta (90), and the following eight films with a score of 85: Higanbana, I Fidanzati, L'argent, Late Autumn, Love and Peace, Noriko's Dinner Table, Soshun, Tokyo Twilight. That is, four films by Yasujiro Ozu, two by Ermanno Olmi, two by Sion Sono, and one each by Watkins, Rohmer and Bresson.
Tier 9 in 2017: 28 films (above average, in other words).
Lowest-scoring films watched in 2017: 4 films with a score of 20: Jurassic Park, On the Silver Globe, and two 2014 telemovies, Betrayed and Runaway.
Seen at the theatre in 2017: 3 films. They are: Voyage of Time: The IMAX Experience, The Endless, 24 Frames.
2017 films watched: only 19 films watched that were released in 2017, the highest scores being for Dunkirk and Logan Lucky (both scores of 70, which for me means Tier 8).
Re-watched in 2017: 24 films. Among them: Murmur of the Heart, Lost Highway, Tale of Tales (1979, score boosted by a point after watching on Blu-ray, taking it to 91 and therefore what I call a masterpiece, both the only short film and the only animated film I put in that category), Twin Peaks (1990, currently still re-watching), Guilty of Romance (score boosted to 85 after watching the full "Japanese" cut).
Total number of rankings at end of 2017: 3900.
Total number of films I now designate as masterpieces (scores between 91 and 100): 97 films. Perhaps 2018 is the year this number will reach 100 (but this is far from guaranteed).
Last edited by djross on Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
our little sister sisters living together in a small japanese coastal town. nothing really happens. about 6 hours too short.
to the wonder sort of the space between people over time. very elegant and entrancing. favourite since badlands
strange days grimey kitsch nocturnal '90s futurism
when marnie was there i can't reallly remember. but the delicate sound design, and the feeling that it's about abandonment and boundless love. poignant and haunted. andrew wyeth gloom in wait for innocent fairytale romance. thresholds
samurai champloo (and cowboy bebop) threaded anthology with glorious choreography ethnography humour drama
cemetery of splendour time as sponge[/spoiler]
i didn't watch much last year. i think princess kaguya did me in at the end of the previous year. favourite was probably a rewatch of lost in translation. if film were a cup of tea
FWIW, all my Tier 10s (with only one from a mainstream studio):
***10*** Masterpiece The Only Living Boy in New York The Good Catholic
***9.5*** Magnificent Wind River
***9*** Outstanding Before I Fall The Promise Guardians of the Galaxy—Vol. 2 Baby Driver Brad’s Status Only the Brave Last Flag Flying Roman J. Israel, Esq. Darkest Hour Molly’s Game
________________________________________ Two I scored zero, neither one of which, I must declare, I watched. Both are based on external reviews and the previews: An Inconvenient Sequel Mother
Stewball wrote:Two I scored zero, neither one of which, I must declare, I watched. An Inconvenient Sequel Mother
Why on earth would you rate films you haven't seen?
You've never seen a preview that showed enough to convince you it was a waste of time, or worse? Both were loaded with negative information which was presented as something they were expressing pride in.
CosmicMonkey wrote:Yeah, but I just don't watch the film, then. I don't rank it a zero (or any score).
Why, when the information you have shows that it's awful? Do you always sit through a whole movie before you rate it? If you leave half way through, do you not rate it?
Looks like I've broken my personal best again, with a new all-time low of 49 films* ranked in the past year.
T10: Arrival (2016) T9: Planet Earth II (2016), Darwin's Nightmare (2004), Alone in the Wilderness (2004), In a Lonely Place (1950) T8: Twin Peaks (2017), Moonlight (2016), Clue (1985), Lola (1961), Frances Ha (2013), Miles Electric: A Different Kind of Blue (2004), 20th Century Women (2016), Twin Peaks (1990), The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) ... ... T2: Lucky Number Slevin (2006), Castle of Owls (1963), La La Land (2016), Two Men and a Wardrobe (1958), Nora-neko rokku: Onna banchô (1970), T1: KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park (1978)
CosmicMonkey wrote:Yeah, but I just don't watch the film, then. I don't rank it a zero (or any score).
Why, when the information you have shows that it's awful? Do you always sit through a whole movie before you rate it? If you leave half way through, do you not rate it?
Yeah, generally I only rank films after I've seen them in their completion, although there are the rare instances of movies so that so insufferable I can't even force myself to sit through it the end, and I will score those films terribly to reflect that.
But a film I haven't even seen a single minute of? Nah, never.
CosmicMonkey wrote:Yeah, but I just don't watch the film, then. I don't rank it a zero (or any score).
Why, when the information you have shows that it's awful? Do you always sit through a whole movie before you rate it? If you leave half way through, do you not rate it?
Yeah, generally I only rank films after I've seen them in their completion, although there are the rare instances of movies so that so insufferable I can't even force myself to sit through it the end, and I will score those films terribly to reflect that.
But a film I haven't even seen a single minute of? Nah, never.
So if they spend 3 minutes of a preview promoting how good they think stupidity is, you still wouldn't rate it, particularly if so noted as I did. It may seem incongruous at first, but I'd never rate something good that I haven't seen to the end--the burden of proof being in the whole picture in that instance. But shit-on-a-stick presented as worthy speaks for itself without further olfactory sufferance.
