aughties classics

Currently, nineteen of the top 100 movies of all time according to IMDb voters were released this decade - that is, in the last six years. Considering that less than 6% of the timespan in which movies have been made account for 19% of the top movies, it would seem at first that this has been an unusually good decade for movies so far.

But popular movies inevitably move down the IMDb lists, as fans finish casting votes, and more sober heads, or even later generations, appraise the film in a more objective, sophisticated, or simply different social context. That is, only time will tell which are classics.

Actually, I don't believe that at all. I believe, with the right analysis, we can make a guess right now which ones are going to hold on in the decades to come. Let's look at the actual nineteen:

• The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (2003)
• The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
• The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
• City of God (2002)
• Memento (2000)
• Amelie (2001)
• Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
• The Pianist (2002)
• Spirited Away (2001)
• The Downfall (2004)
• Hotel Rwanda (2004)
• Requiem for a Dream (2000)
• Million Dollar Baby (2004)
• Crash (2004)
• Sin City (2005)
• The Incredibles (2004)
• Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
• Donnie Darko (2001)
• Finding Nemo (2003)

The first striking thing about this list is that 2005 has only one representative - #73 Sin City - and that was released way back in March/April. One possible explanation is the December rush of "quality" movies in order to make the Oscar cutoff - most people haven't seen the great movies of 2005 yet. In fact, there are only 4 movies from 2005 in IMDb's entire Top 250 list, the latest of which (Batman Begins) was released in June.

But I have an alternative explanation: as far as movies go, this year sucked. Of the 2005 movies I've seen so far, I do think Sin City is the only one iconic enough to have any staying power. The frontrunner in the Golden Globes race, Brokeback Mountain, hasn't even broken the Top 250 yet. It's simply too normal a movie to be a classic.

What about the rest of this decade?

As much as I love animated features, Finding Nemo, Spirited Away, and even The Incredibles, cannot compare to the other movies on this list. While not as laughably poor in dialogue, character development, theme, and story structure as most animated features, these would not make good live action movies if transferred to that milieu verbatim.

Similarly, while The Lord of the Rings is still my favorite book, the movies are too technical, too conventional, and just plain too hollow to merit 3 of the top 20 spots on the all-time greats lists.

What about the Tarantino/Rodriguez splatterfests, Sin City and Kill Bill? These guys have been practically synonymous with male coolness and style for the past decade, and do not disappoint with orgasmic visuals (especially Sin City). But they are thoroughly genre films, with no point beyond the slickness, and so lack the universal appeal that is the hallmark of a classic film.

That leaves eleven more or less non-genre movies, typical candidates for classics. Of these, I have seen all but two: Crash and The Downfall. The other nine are exceptional movies, either superbly crafted like Million Dollar Baby, Hotel Rwanda, and The Pianist; or fresh and innovative, like Memento, Requiem for a Dream, and Eternal Sunshine. But these are both incidental criterion, optional pre-requisites. What is the core criterion of a classic movie?

Above all, a classic must be memorable. Superb craftsmanship helps little here, but innovation is important. More often, the keys to sticking in viewer's minds are iconic images, powerful performances, and sparkling (or spark-filled) dialogue or songs.

Where does that leave the movies that are merely well-crafted? I believe Million Dollar Baby to be possibly the most perfectly-crafted feature film ever made, but also recognize that it has precious little innovation. The understated performances, story structure, and dialogue are pitch perfect, but not very memorable. Sadly, I think this one will fade.

Hotel Rwanda, The Pianist, and City of God are superb social consciousness movies. While they do focus on personal stories, and wring some strong performances from their casts, those stories are simply there to hold our interest while the point is being made. With conventional views on the issues treated always evolving, this type of movie runs a strong risk of obsolescence. I think they will last a long time with a liberal audience, like Meryl Streep films of the 70s and 80s, but are not likely to ever be seen in the same kind of light as, say, Citizen Kane or The Grapes of Wrath, let alone Casablanca or Apocalypse Now.

Of the non-genre films, the only comedy is Amelie. One can hardly call the dialogue in Amelie "sparkling" (even translated), but the screenplay itself is witty, and Audrey Tautou's precious reaction shots and the virtuoso cinematography and idiosyncratic portrait of Montmartre more than make up for it. So there's one candidate.

Memento's innovations were in editing, but pretty much only in that. Once the novelty wears off, there's not much left, and I certainly don't remember any particular image or bit of dialogue five years after I last watched it. Nix that.

Donnie Darko fails for another reason. Here, I can point to statistics: IMDb's demographic breakdown shows a steady decline in average rating with increasing age group, ranging from 9.0 for 18-and-under to 7.1 for 45-and-older. While fresh, serious, and well-acted, it is a teen movie, and as those teens grow up and new teens fail to relate to the social backdrop of Darko, it will inevitably drop off the list.

Requiem for a Dream tried to capture the experience of being high in its cinematography. There are some memorable images here, especially of Ellen Burstyn and post-surgical Jared Leto. Again, Ellen Burstyn puts in a memorable performance as the mom on speed. So, even though the theme of the movie left me cold, I'd have to say this is a candidate too.

And that leaves Eternal Sunshine. While not my favorite film of the decade so far (that would be Amelie), I do think it has the most going for it. Extremely likeable stars in Jim Carrey (in serious mode) and Kate Winslet, combined with edgy cinematography, seemingly free-form, but still comprehensible, editing, a touch of existentialist philosophy, and, most of all, a down-to-earth, even heartwarming, love story. This one, I think, is destined for greatness.

So that's my best guess: Eternal Sunshine, followed by Amelie and Requiem for a Dream. To this woefully short list, I'd add Gladiator (#150 on IMDb), a true epic with exceptional performances and five Oscars to keep it on people's Netflix queues. My bet is all the others will fade over the next three decades; maybe even these four as well.

Four movies in six years. Just off the top of my head, I can rattle off half a dozen undisputable classics from 1939 alone. I revise my earlier appraisal of 2005: this whole decade kinda sucks.