Much like its Best Picture winner, the most recent Oscar ceremony was good and well-performed, but utterly predictable.  The show's producers were interested in skewing towards a younger demographic by having James Franco and Anne Hathaway host it, but that didn't stop the members of the Academy (average age: 57) from showing their true colors by keeping it old-fashioned and naming the nice and safe The King's Speech as their winner over the bold, revolutionary The Social Network.  It's all very simple: The King's Speech is a feel-good, Academy-friendly film, while The Social Network is a groundbreaking film that isn't really interested in making you feel good or bad: it just wants to startle you and rile you up with its terrific observations about the descent of social interactions.  I prefer experiencing what the latter film wants me to experience, but well, other people have other preferences, and I can't do much about that.  It wasn't much of a surprise, to be honest, but my gosh, no best director Oscar for David Fincher?  I don't know if Academy members saw the special features on The Social Network DVD, but if they had, they would've had no doubt about how perfectly directed that film was.  Because of Fincher's snub, it wouldn't surprise me if, a few years from now, he makes a film that isn't quite as amazing, but they still give him the award for it, just to finally give him his due.  I'm appalled by the politics that go into the Oscars.

Which brings me to Melissa Leo.  Hers was my favorite of all the supporting actress performances that were nominated... until I heard about her self-promoting campaign a few days ago.  You see, I'm a lover of movies and I try to steer clear of celebrity gossip, because I'm not interested in it: if Roman Polanski is a great director, I'm going to continue to appreciate his movies, and whatever immoral things he may or may not have done are, quite frankly, his business, and they have nothing to do with his output as a filmmaker.  But what Leo did is sufficiently connected to the movies that I found it to be a bit of gossip worth getting worked up over.  There should be NO campaigning involved when it comes to giving awards to films or performances.  Your ONLY piece of advertisement should be the performance itself.  I think Leo is a fantastic actress, and this won't stop me from seeking out her work, but man, that was so lame.  I'm sure that, if she read this, she might respond "Well, hey, it worked!", and my response would be that her magnificent performance in The Fighter should've been enough for her to convince voters.

I was initially feeling optimistic that The Social Network would possibly win, because it started out winning a few awards at the start of the evening, including the very important Editing award (which often goes to the eventual best picture winner), and a much-deserved nod for the film's (super) original score.  But what they did was reserve most of The King's Speech's wins for later in the evening.  Once director Tom Hooper snagged his award, it was obviously a lost cause.  I kept hoping for a miraculous picture-director split, but no such luck.  Colin Firth's best actor win is, however, very much deserved, and I'm not too miffed about that one anyway, because people like Jesse Eisenberg and James Franco obviously have years and years to continue giving great performances and getting recognized for them.  As expected as Natalie Portman's triumph was, it may have been one of the awards I cheered for the most.  It was, after all, the year's best performance, and she gave a very inspired speech.  Now that awards season is over and a new year in cinema is starting, with "less serious" movies coming up in the next few months, what I absolutely can't wait for is to see Franco and Portman teaming up in David Gordon Green's stoner comedy Your Highness.  If the results are anything similar to what Green accomplished with Pineapple Express, I think we're in for an early-year comedic treat.

Oh, and speaking of Franco... I haven't read many other people's reactions to the way the hosting part of the ceremony was handled, but I won't be surprised if there a lot of "wtf, why did he seem so distracted, and staring off somewhere else?" comments.  Those comments will probably come from people who aren't aware of Franco's unorthodox/awkward/geeky humor (which I love).  It's evidence that you can be incredibly attractive and still exude goofiness and insecurity - I love it.  I agree that it may be a little off-putting for the Oscars, but I think that any of the awkwardness was probably off-set by the wonderfully charming Anne Hathaway.  If anyone had doubts before last night that Hathaway is going to become a regal, luminous movie star, I hope they've now been dispelled.  She's super funny, amiable, attractive, a great actress, and she can even sing - what more can you ask for?  The initial skit (in which Alec Baldwin and Morgan Freeman showed up as well) was hilarious.  Hathaway could probably come back next year on her own and do a great job solo hosting.  Don't get me wrong, I love Franco, but the guy is more of an intellectual, "film person" (in case you didn't know, despite being such a successful actor, he goes to film school at NYU), while Hathaway is more of a "show-woman" but a great one at that.  While last night's co-hosts certainly couldn't conceal the Academy's average age and its impact on who wins awards, at least they made it an enjoyable three hours.  In what was a mediocre year for movies, it almost makes sense that The King's Speech won because, when people look back on 2010 a few years from now, that'll give them an impression of how underwhelming it was.  Steven Spielberg made me feel a lot better about it when he noted that the best picture WINNER would join the likes of On the Waterfront, while the nine other nominees would join the likes of Citizen Kane.  The message we should take away from this is, who cares?  It's just the best picture award.  The other, better films that didn't end up winning still exist, and will be available to be enjoyed... aaaaand to gripe, ten years from now, about how ridiculous it is that one of them didn't win over that movie about the stuttering king, whose name may eventually elude us.  Here's hoping 2011 is better.

Good heavens, what a weak year in cinema 2010 was.  I don't know if it's simply coincidental that so much mediocrity was deposited into multiplexes this year or if the studio heads have simply decided that mediocrity is what sells best.  If it's the latter, then I certainly hope that 2010, which was awash in lame sequels, remakes and reboots, will serve as the lesson that, sure, people are okay with going to see sequels, remakes and reboots, as long as they're actually GOOD.  Studio heads assumed that people would flock to see Sex and the City 2, simply because it was yet another film based on the popular HBO series... and people indeed flocked to see it opening weekend, but the flocking stopped as soon as everyone heard that it was a piece of junk.  I think that the mistake studio heads have made is that they've thought "Well, if people liked this story before, let's give it to them again, and they'll like it no matter what," when what they should REALLY be thinking is "Okay, people liked this story before, so let's do a sequel/reboot/remake that is just as good (or better) than the original, in order to do it justice."  In other words, studio heads have made the mistake of thinking that, if you're gonna make a film based on a story that audiences are already familiar with, you're exempt from the requirement of having the film be of QUALITY entertainment.  I sure hope they've realized their mistake, or else, we may be in for an equally dreary result in 2011.

To give you an idea of how bad a year this was for movies, let me talk about ratings for a second.  I didn't give out a single 10/10 OR 9/10 in the entire year (on RT's new rating scale, that means I didn't give any film a 100% or a 90% at any point of the year).  What that means for ME is that there were no great movies (9/10), let alone any masterpieces (10/10).  I've already discussed in responses to some people's comments of my reviews how I assign my ratings, and how a "90%" for me may not mean the same that it does for you, so I won't rehash that explanation here.  Only three films scored an 8/10 (which means "extremely good"), and they are, of course, my top three films of the year.  The remaining seven movies on my top 10 list all scored a 7/10 (which means "very good").  During the entire year, I kept hoping that I would at least see one movie that would blow me away, but no such luck.

Of course, there are always refreshing surprises and 2010 wasn't lacking in a few them.  In fact, since the year was so weak, I'm not even gonna try to establish any sense of suspense here: the best film of the year was Toy Story 3.  It's the one sequel that didn't bank on the success of its predecessors and ensured to give us something of quality.  It was the most satisfying, entertaining and emotionally affecting film I saw in the entire year.  The amazing thing about this, though, is that although Toy Story 3  was the best film of this particular year, it's not even Pixar's best overall film ever, which gives you a pretty good idea at how this year stacks up against other years.  Still, the more important thing to be gathered from this is that Pixar is, without a doubt, a studio we can always trust in.  If all other sectors of cinemas continue giving us washed-over, mediocre plots, we can always count on these folks for something inventive and worth seeing.

I saw a magazine cover recently that identified 2010 as "the year we stopped talking to each other," what with texting and Facebook dominating social interactions now.  Even though I'm 25, I feel kind of like an old soul in the midst of all that: I still prefer talking to people face-to-face.  And I've felt that same type of frustration in light of the "changes" that RT has endured.  I don't mean to be critical of all other RT users when I say this, but this whole thing now of people obsessing over making sure others read their reviews and comment on them, and the desire to get as many "thumbs up" as possible on what they write is ridiculous.  Don't get me wrong: it's always a pleasant surprise when someone comments on my review, and I can have an exchange with that person about our feelings on the movie.  But if I constantly spam people with messages saying "Read this review of this" and "Read this review of that," it feels more like I'm whoring out my reviews, and that's not the point.  My other issue is with people who give others the "thumbs down" on a review simply because they don't AGREE with your rating.  The "thumbs up/thumbs down" should be used to express your opinion on the QUALITY of the review, regardless of whether or not you agree with it.  I have to admit I scoff every time I read a review in which someone simply says "I thought this movie was awesome and really well done" and then after they send a message asking people to read it, people post comments saying "Great review!", etc.  Great review?  Really?  I preferred it when RT was more based on having a community of people who were here to write quality reviews rather than to post a short sentence that's as long as a Twitter update to see how many comments it gets.  I preferred it when RT was less like Facebook and more like a site for true cinephiles.  But I know most people disagree, and like I said, I feel like an old soul in all this, and I have no control over the direction in which social dynamics are headed.  I'm still gonna rejoice in the hobby of writing my thoughts about the films I watch and of using RT as the great resource that it is (read: it often helps me avoid torturous cinematic experiences), regardless of how other people choose to use it.

I'm just as shocked as I was last year about how some people, including professional critics for chrissake, decided to post their top 10 list right at the end of the year, even if they hadn't seen all of the films released.  I don't understand the urge to ENSURE the list is up by December 31st.  If I had done that, I would've missed out on including Blue Valentine, Howl and Love and Other Drugs, two of which are on my actual top 10, and one of which is getting an honorary mention.  Considering that the year was so lacking in "good top 10 choices," it was a must to see everything that was out there before compiling what I thought the best of the year was.  Of course, a lot of people also like talking about what they thought the WORST of the year was.  I don't do that because, like I said, thanks to RT, I avoid a lot of the dross out there.  I enjoy reviewing films, but I could never do it for a living, because I can't imagine being forced to watch all the bad stuff that gets put out there.  I think I'd stop being a movie lover if I did.  I go see what I think I might have a chance of liking... but of course, even with that approach, you always run into disappointments.  The first list I'm presenting this year isn't a list of the WORST films I saw in 2010, but rather, it's a list of the DISAPPOINTMENTS.  These are movies I thought I had a chance of loving or at least liking a heck of a lot, and they proved way below expectations.  And just so you know, I try not to let expectations affect me too much when it comes to films, but when it came to these four movies, it was impossible because of how short they fell of what they could've accomplished.

The four biggest disappointments of 2010 (alphabetical):

1. Fair Game - I get excited about films that have to do with political conspiracies, and if you tell me that actors of the caliber of Sean Penn and Naomi Watts (my all-time favorite actress) are in it, I'm totally in.  To be sure, Fair Game was a somewhat interesting film based on a real life story that we heard about very recently, but my gosh, the preachy approach the film takes in its final act is almost unforgivable.  I'm as liberal as can be, but I'm not a fan of having an idea jammed down my throat, even if it's an idea I support or would agree with.  The final moments of Fair Game consist of liberal propaganda.  There's no cinematic/dramatic finesse here.  The film might as well be yelling "Be angry!" at its audience.  I want films to bring their points about subtly and intelligently, not to TELL me what to think.

2. The Kids Are All Right - Normally, I only include films on this list that I've given a rotten rating to (read: films that I don't think are recommendable).  I'm making an exception here.  I gave a 6/10 to The Kids Are All Right, which means that I think it's good and worth seeing.  The problem is that the film could've been fantastic.  It's got two very interesting controversial subjects and it ends up ignoring BOTH of them to give us a somewhat generic love triangle.  First, we've got the subject of a lesbian couple having successfully raised two children.  Second, we've got the subject of those two children wanting to find out who their real father is.  BOTH of those subjects combined would've made for a delightful indie drama, which is what the film is during its first act... until it decides it would rather just focus on a conventional infidelity plot.  If the film's lead couple hadn't been composed of lesbians, the whole dynamic with one of them cheating on the other would've been absolutely nothing special.  I have no clue why the film disposed of its two initial storylines and instead went for something that was so much less interesting for its dramatic thrust.

3. Never Let Me Go - Yet another missed opportunity, except that Never Let Me Go is a much worse film than The Kids Are All Right.  An appealing cast, the subject of human cloning and a potentially devastating piece of dramatic filmmaking is turned into syrupy, frustrating melodrama.  It's been a while since I've seen such a poorly-constructed love triangle.  With its impulsive score and its manipulative script, the movie basically begs us to cry.  As I said before, I don't want a film to beg me to do anything.

4. True Grit - This was by far the biggest disappointment for me, and it's also the choice for this list that people are most likely to disagree with.  It seems people who went to see True Grit had loads of fun.  I'm glad that they did and I'm glad that they were able to simply accept the fact that the Coen brothers chose to do something mainstream.  But it was impossible for me.  I adore the sibling directors' signature unconventional humor too much to think much of the straightforward and predictable True Grit.  Roger Deakins' cinematography is amazing as ever, but that factor alone isn't enough to cut it for me.  The other big problem here is that most people were able to easily accept the lead child character as real and get engrossed in the experience of the film.  As good as Hailee Steinfeld's performance is, the character is written as impossibly intelligent, and the film truly does nothing to give us background on her in order to get us to believe that.  I normally rejoice in listening to the Coens' dialogue, but when Steinfeld's character spoke it in the film, I could do nothing but raise my eyebrow skeptically, and when you have a problem like that with the protagonist, that's certainly enough to ruin the experience of watching the film.

-----------------------

My favorite performances of 2010 (alphabetical):

There's definitely always SOME correlation between my choices on this list and the choices that the Oscars come up with for the four acting categories, but it's important to note the differences.  While the Academy voters may take a number of factors into consideration when voting for nominees (including factors that SHOULDN'T be considered, like who hasn't been nominated before), I simply ask myself the question: "Who had an effect on me, while I watched him/her on the screen?"  Surprisingly, even though there was such a shortage of good films in 2010, I didn't struggle too hard to come up with this list, and I've got 15 names, which is two more than last year's list.  Jesse Eisenberg is the only person on this year's list who was also in last year's.

1. Amy Adams (The Fighter) - I called her character "one tough bitch" in my review, which sounds about right, though I think "one great actress" would be the more appropriate term here.  Adams gives it her all in every role, and all The Fighter proves is that she isn't only great when playing weak, innocent characters.  The ferocity of Adams' character here is key, because it's the strength that helps drive the protagonist, the man she's fallen in love with, to triumph.  In the same way, the ferocity of Adams' performance is one of the factors that elevate a pedestrian movie like The Fighter into something worth seeing.

2. Casey Affleck (The Killer Inside Me) - Some of the people whose reviews of The Killer Inside Me I read weren't thrilled at all with Affleck's work in the lead role here, but I was more than thrilled.  Affleck's character goes from docile to maniacal in more than one scene, and the transition proves constantly impressive and easy to believe.  Affleck says a lot in his performances through mere subtle facial expressions, and I can't wait to see his next film.

3. Annette Bening (The Kids Are All Right) -  Despite the negative thoughts that I expressed earlier about the film, let there be no doubt about the greatness of Bening's performance in the film.  In fact, I've watched the film twice, and I think  my desire for the second viewing was simply to take a second look at how nuanced and perfect her work is here.  There's a particular scene that has stuck with me (and that I hope is played on Oscar night) in which her character, Nic, is just sitting there at the table not saying anything, while her girlfriend Jules is talking about the projects she's been working on.  Watch Bening in this scene, the way she twitches her mouth, smiles nervously and nods skeptically as Julianne Moore's character talks, and tell me that's not fantastic acting.  Her character has no lines of dialogue in that particular moment, yet she says a million things to us in a matter of seconds.

4. Robert Duvall (Get Low) - I would be ecstatic if Duvall scored an Oscar nomination for his work here.  I realize that Get Low is a small film (though it's worth seeking out), but I sure hope the Academy takes note of this.  He deserves it not because he's an old veteran who may not have that many films left in him, but because of his emotionally devastating work in this film.  Get Low could've been a short, 15-minute film that consisted only of the monologue that Duvall's character delivers during the final act, and that alone would be worth citing the actor for his work.

5. Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network) - It's the best male performance of the year, in what is easily the movie of the year.  I've been following Eisenberg longer than a lot of people, after witnessing his fantastic work in films like Roger Dodger and The Squid and the Whale.  There may be some bias involved here because his character in the latter film is one of my favorite movie characters ever, but still, there's no doubt that he's a terrific actor.  When I cited him last year for his heart-wrenching turn in Adventureland, I went on a rant about how pissed off it makes me that so many people make the mistake of comparing him to Michael Cera, when in fact, there is NOTHING to compare: they don't look alike, they don't play the same characters, and Eisenberg is a more skilled performer.  Thankfully, now that Eisenberg is about to get a wallop of awards recognition for his work as Mark Zuckerberg, I trust that the unfounded comparisons will come to an end, and people will realize he's in a whole other league.  Eisenberg's line delivery in The Social Network is pure brilliance.  He takes what could've easily been a severely annoying character and turns him into the perfect anti-hero.  The performance has no interest in aping the real Mark Zuckerberg.  What the performance does is simply help further along the point that the film is making: that the website that is currently dominating social masses was, ironically, created by someone who is socially inept.  With his performance, Eisenberg (who, in real life, doesn't even use Facebook much) warns us that if we continue letting something like Facebook make us lose so much of our social humanity, we're all going to become exactly like the character he portrays.

6. Colin Firth (The King's Speech) - I have to admit that I wasn't as roused by The King's Speech as most people were.  I did like it, and thought the acting and art direction were terrific, but the truth is that it's a pretty typical underdog story, and nothing else to really write home about.  The same can't be said for Firth's performance, though, whose depiction of the fear of public speaking is simply brilliant.  As someone who is just as afraid of speaking in front of a crowd, I could relate so easily to the paranoia on Firth's eyes as he stuttered and muttered his way through his attempts at delivering speeches, and that's a testament to the authenticity of his acting.

7. James Franco (127 Hours and Howl) - The Oscars and other precursors will only cite Franco for his work in 127 Hours, as the adventurous mountain climber who gets stuck in a physically dire situation, and they won't recognize him for his work as beat poet Allen Ginsberg in Howl (which is the better film, contrary to what critics will tell you).  Both performances are astounding in their own way.  In the first film, Franco has to carry the entire weight on his shoulders.  When you can't keep your eyes off an actors' performance despite the fact that the camera is on him the entire time, that's highly impressive.  In the more unfamiliar Howl, there are some scenes that are meant to be interviews of the poet (as though it were a documentary), and Franco's unabashed honesty during those scenes makes you forget it's Franco on screen.  We just see Ginsberg.  If that's enough, Franco's recitation of some of Ginsberg's poems alone is worth the admission price.  And yes, the fact that he's incredibly handsome and has a heart-melting smile just makes it all better. :)

8. Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) - When you're playing a supporting role, but your character serves as the film's emotional epicenter, there's a lot resting on you.  Before watching The Social Network, I had no doubt that Garfield would do an excellent job here, because I had seen his magnificent performance in 2008's Boy A.  Everyone else was talking about how they didn't know who this guy was and how they wondered whether or not he'd make a good Spider-Man, while I already knew that he was the perfect choice for the part.  The Social Network's emotional oomph during its last act comes thanks to the betrayal that Eduardo suffers, and Garfield handles this with incredible finesse.  The climactic scene in which Eduardo breaks Mark's laptop and nearly has a fist fight with Sean Parker could've easily had Garfield going over the top, but that doesn't even come close to happening.

9. Ryan Gosling (Blue Valentine) - You've met the character who Gosling plays in this film.  He's the 30-year-old who's still stuck in goofiness and hasn't really grown up yet and doesn't have much of an interest in taking things seriously.  But that hardly makes him unlikable.  In a film as heartfelt and painful as Blue Valentine, Gosling makes it believable that one could fall in love with someone like Dean, despite all his flaws.  His performance during the film's final few minutes (when the emotions explode and splatter all over the place) makes Blue Valentine close with a sense of utter devastation.  You can't ask much more than that from a dramatic performance.

10. Melissa Leo (The Fighter) - Anyone can play a villain mother.  We've seen them in tons of movies.  What's hard to do is for an actress to avoid just playing unabashed evil, and to instead give us a mixture of good intentions with ill-conceived ways to accomplish them.  Leo's character in The Fighter loves all the children she has, but she hasn't been taught how to love them.  The fact that the actress manages to get that across to us and lets us sympathize with her rather than simply despise her as an unrealistic villain with no redeeming qualities is impressive.

11. Chloe Moretz (Kick-Ass and Let Me In) - As far as child actresses are concerned this year, everyone is talking about Hailee Steinfeld's performance in True Grit.  I already expressed my feelings on that subject.  For some reason, the child actress who I simply can't get out of my head this year is little Moretz.  Talk about two completely different performances, both of which are thoroughly impressive.  As over-the-top a role as her Hit Girl in Kick-Ass is, we don't stop believing for a second that she's like a deadly viper.  But what impresses me even more is that, though she plays a vampire in Let Me In, there's really no aggressiveness or ferocity in that film's performance because, despite what the film is about, it's a more sullen and subtle cinematic piece, and Moretz acts accordingly.  The range of emotions she displays as the lead in Let Me In is a sure-fire sign that this girl will excel greatly at complicated dramatic roles.  I look forward to seeing her in a few of those soon.

12. Natalie Portman (Black Swan) - Leaps and bounds the best performance by a female this year.  This is innocence and paranoia played to perfection.  Portman's performance is what makes Black Swan soar to the levels it does.  The film may not always do an effective job at cluing us into what's happening to the protagonist, but her bravura work constantly makes it impossible to look away from Nina.  Portman is in every scene of the film and her performance never ceases to be emotionally incisive and devastating.

13. Ryan Reynolds (Buried) - The chances of Reynolds scoring a Best Actor nomination are incredibly slim, but I would cheer for joy if it happened.  If anything, Buried proves what I discovered last year when I saw Adventureland: that Reynolds made a mistake in starting out a career making crappy comedies.  He belongs in the genre of drama.  His face is on screen the entire time, and the film's impact depends completely on his staggering performance.  He delivers fiercely.

14. Naomi Watts (Mother and Child) - I hate the fact that this was generally a bad year for Watts.  There's obviously some bias involved in my saying this, but because she's my favorite actress, I WANT her to make good movies.  Woody Allen's You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger was an awful, lifeless excuse of a comedy that gave her no room to shine.  I already expressed my feelings on Fair Game.  And then there's Mother and Child, a very good film, and the only one in which Watts was able to (once again) show us how fantastic she is at portraying thoroughly flawed characters.  If I were solely in charge of deciding who wins the Best Supporting Actress award, I'd give it to Watts for this film.

15. Michelle Williams (Blue Valentine) - Because we're shown alternating time periods during Blue Valentine, Williams essentially has to play two characters in the film: the hopeful, ecstatic girl who has a great future ahead of her, and the dissatisfied wife who resents her husband severely for not exploiting his own potential and for not letting her exploit hers.  Williams does both jobs incredibly well.  The scene at the abortion clinic is so raw and painful, and it's all thanks to her perfect work.

-------

My top 10 of 2010:

Yes, as bad a year as it may have been, the "requirement" of making a top 10 list still exists.  I say "requirement" in quotation marks because obviously nobody FORCES anyone to do it, but well, it's fun, even in a year in which the choices are kind of limited.  In fact, I normally include four films in my list of honorary mentions, but I'm including only three this year.  As always, the list is obviously not meant to be a definitive authority on what the actual best films of the year are - no list is.  The Academy now nominates 10 movies for Best Picture, and I would bet all the money I have that I won't coincide perfectly with them.  Then again, it's hard to imagine that even the Academy believes that the 10 films it selects are truly the best (there are, um, other factors at work here, but I actually plan to talk about those when I blog about the nominations on the 25th).  For what it's worth, here's what I would nominate.  As usual, the list is in "reverse order" which means that the LAST film I mention is #1, my favorite of the year.

Honorary Mentions (alphabetical): Buried, How to Train Your Dragon, Love and Other Drugs

#10. Restrepo - When it comes to documentaries, there's one factor that will probably pre-condition whether or not you'll actually like the film: your interest in the subject matter.  I'll admit that I watched Restrepo only because of the critical acclaim and not because I was interested in the subject.  Call me disconnected from the world's problems, but the topic of war doesn't interest me very much.  It's incredible that Restrepo manages to be such an involving experience.  Rather than focusing on battles and loud explosions, it cares more about the soldier's experience.  I'd rather hear a soldier talk in confessional style about how he felt while he was being fired at than to actually "see" all the mess happen.  Seeing it happen only gives you YOUR perspective on it, whereas hearing WHAT IT FELT LIKE for the person who went through it gives you far better of an idea of what it was truly like.  The emotional journey that these soldiers go through is enthralling to watch.  Last year's best picture winner The Hurt Locker won the Oscar simply because of its relevance to current issues.  To be sure, The Hurt Locker is a good film, but its decision to focus more on the mechanics of war than on the emotional experience of the characters wasn't so much to my liking.  Restrepo could've done the same, but it takes the other direction instead, and that's highly commendable.

#9. Scott Pilgrim vs. the World - Ah, what a joy it is to watch this movie.  It's a pure visual delight and it's got so many one-line zingers that they're impossible to count.  It's the best comedy of 2010.  The script is nothing short of sheer brilliance.  Some aspects of it will be enjoyed more by video gamers, but the overall story is easily accessible for anyone who's got an open enough mind.  The movie is a little longer than it should be (as a result of a few missteps in the final act) but that doesn't negate the amount of unabashed fun that is to be had here.

#8. Howl - Easily the most underrated movie of the year.  It's a gem that I imagine a lot of people haven't yet seen.  I didn't get around to watching it till the DVD came out, and I'm so glad I did before compiling my top 10.  If you're a lover of poetry, you may like the film even more than I did.  The animated sequences with lively depictions of the themes explored in Allen Ginsberg's poems (while we listen to James Franco's excellent recitation of the poems' lines) are so engrossing and terrific.  You can almost get a high from them.  Some of the film's court room scenes feel a bit procedural and straightforward, but that's a mere quibble.  Howl's tribute to Ginsberg is impossible to dismiss, and Franco's performance as the poet is something to marvel at.

#7. Inception  - Okay, don't yell at me, please.  If you're like most people, you've probably placed Inception much higher on your list.  I'd just like to say, though, that placing a movie as #7 on my top 10 list is a big deal to me, and Inception definitely deserves it, as it is, without a doubt, one of the most intelligent films of the year.  The idea of this exploration of the many possible layers of dreams is incredibly ingenious.  The slight nitpick I have with the film has to do with the path it takes to depict those layers.  What we get to see is a team of people going on a mission, and the complications of that mission lead to pedestrian, shoot-out action sequences.  The only interesting/entertaining action sequence in Inception is the zero-gravity scene - everything else is kinda meh.  If the EVENTS that had occurred during the dreams had more to do with people's emotional demons or if the film went really deep into how far the mind can really go in imagining things, Inception may have easily been a masterpiece of dream exploration a la Mulholland Drive.  But because, at its heart, it's an action movie, it can't go that far into dark waters.  Still, there's no doubt that the film's mere idea is brilliant and that the film as a whole is pretty engrossing.  The aspect of the film that deals with the lead character's relationship with his wife is handled perfectly, and the film could've easily been even better if it had made that its focus.

#6. The Exploding Girl - If you've ever been in love or even infatuated with someone who is a close friend of yours, and you've had to deal with the strangeness of being that person's friend while trying to suppress your feelings as much as you can, The Exploding Girl will resonate with you intensely.  This is the rare strictly dialogue-based drama that doesn't stop being engrossing because its characters are so well-drawn.  The film is also a very accurate depiction of the doldrums of being back home on break from college: it's that weirdness of being back in a familiar place despite the fact that you've obviously experienced emotional changes as far as maturity and other things are concerned.  It's an incredibly sweet movie, but without being annoyingly saccharine, and the ending is left open to interpretation in a way that pure romantics will definitely think one thing and the cynics will think something else.  You've got to praise a movie when it can have that effect.

#5. Black Swan - Impossible to look away from.  When you walk out of Black Swan, it's easy to be skeptical about certain things and complain about how the film is at times freaky for the sake of being freaky rather than to deliver any coherent message, but WHILE you're watching the film, it's impossible to focus on those things.  It's that enthralling.  Those of us who lead a mostly innocent life and haven't gotten in touch with our dark side may be the ones who are impacted most deeply by Black Swan. Natalie Portman's performance is a master's work.

#4. Kick-Ass - Hands down, the most fun I had at the movies this year.  With its frenetic pace and delightfully self-aware dialogue, Kick-Ass is exactly what mainstream cinematic entertainment should be (too bad the box office and I disagree).  If that were it, Kick-Ass would probably be a little lower on the list, but there are two more factors that, in my mind, make the film utterly brilliant.  First of all, the way it both glorifies and satirizes the superhero movie is astoundingly seamless: you never feel like it's paying TOO much tribute to the genre, yet the film never feels like a cheap parody.  Secondly, its sharp criticism of the YouTube generation (which may go over a lot of people's heads) is terrific.  There's nothing accidental about a scene in which a character who is asked to call 911 when there's a dangerous fight going on prefers to use his cell phone to record the violent events rather than to make the call.  And the sequence in which audiences are shown ogling over an execution-style video is even more telling.  In fact, I'm glad that I'm placing Kick-Ass on the list right below The Social Network because the two films are easily the two most socially relevant cautionary tales we saw in theaters in 2010.  You can't just dismiss Kick-Ass as a violent romp and move on.  It's a very intelligent movie, and the entertainment it has to offer is of the highest caliber.

#3. The Social Network - There's little doubt that this is the movie of the year.  Aaron Sorkin's script is leaps and bounds the wittiest we got to hear in the entire year, and the actors' performances and their deliveries of Sorkin's lines are utterly perfect.  I recommend buying the two-disc collector's edition of the DVD.  If you had any doubts about how much David Fincher deserves to win for Best Director, they'll be dispelled after you watch the special features, which contain one of the best in-depth look at the process of directing a film that I've ever seen on a DVD's extras. But of course, what gives The Social Network that extra push towards the realm of greatness is its undeniable relevance.  If this is, indeed, the year in which "we stopped talking to each other," then this film came out at the perfect time as a warning of how un-human social interaction is becoming.  The Social Network's current frontrunner status in the Best Picture race is easily deserved.

#2. Blue Valentine - But as much as I may objectively agree with the general consensus that The Social Network is the year's best, it's hard to avoid what one emotionally gravitates to, especially as I work my way towards the top of my list.  Blue Valentine is the best live-action film of 2010, and it is also the year's most devastating movie.  Its relentlessly honest look at the highs and lows of a relationship is more amazing to me than any of the big special effects in summer blockbusters.  We don't enjoy Blue Valentine because it's "fun" to watch.  We enjoy it because we can't help being emotionally drawn into this searing story of the implosion of a couple.  Love and its consequences have hardly ever looked so genuine on screen.

#1. Toy Story 3 - Others have said it, but it bears repeating: Pixar can do no wrong.  This film has it all: hilarious dialogue, fun action sequences, carefully drawn characters, and ultimately, utter heartbreak.  This last aspect is what separates Toy Story 3 from other animated fare.  As wonderful as the movie is throughout its running time, it's what happens during the final act that makes the film approach greatness.  Toy Story 3 has a lot to say about how difficult it is to make transitions in life from one place to another, to get out of your comfort zone, to let go of people you love.  ANY film that treats those subjects effectively deserves a lot of credit, but when it's accomplished by an animated movie (and without letting it be a turn-off for the kids), it's eminently praiseworthy.  I teared up during the final minutes of Toy Story 3 - no other film in 2010 had that much power over me.