So I was asked the other day, "hey your a film guy what was the best film of this past decade?" Fuck. I knew that was coming. Began seeing it around the web and just recently in Entertainment Weekly. Didn't take much thinking though and rolled right of my tongue: The Lord of The Ring Trilogy. Hands down. Especially if you count the extended DVD versions. But hey, you say, that's three movies. No, not really. They were all shot at the same time and are meant to viewed as one. In fact its the closest a film has come to what TV has been doing this decade in what has become known as "mega-movies." (Personally I would rather call them mega-shows as they have more in common with television shows in their structure than film.) Anyway, that's my pick for the film(s) of the decade. I really can't think of any other movie that sparked such geek speak among people I know. In fact I bet that if they were to be released again there would be lines around the theatre to see it again, I don't care how big your plasma TV is.
Speaking of TV if had to pick a show it would be HBO's "The Wire." Without a doubt it was the best show on television. Ever. (AMC's "Mad Men" comes in a very close second, by the way. I would have picked HBO's "Carnivale" but it never was completed so maybe it should be awarded Best Incomplete Show.) Some of the characters in this show I miss like real people. Lester Freamon (Clarke Peters), Bunk Moreland (Wendell Pierce), Bubbles (Andre Royo), Omar Little (Michael K. Williams) and Dennis "Cutty" Wise (Chad Coleman) just to name a few. I've never experienced such fleshed out characters on TV before. Not mention the plot, which is really about the crumbling of a city. Nothing works right anymore in Baltimore, even the bad guys. If you never had the opportunity to see "The Wire" navigate over to Netfix and add it to you're queue. Better yet, buy it.
But I'm going to make an exception here based on the idea that I never felt that the Emmys and the Golden Globes are fair comparing a cable show, that has no restrictions on its writing, to a network show that is heavily restricted. So my pick for a network show is, and I'm prepared to take shit for this, is ABC's "Lost." And its not why you think, although I do dig the show a lot. As Steven King said it, "At its best Lost has never been about a fantasy island floating unmoored in time; its been about the people." Entertainment Weekly put it the best: " Name another network drama that can wondrously turn a ? into a !" Couldn't of said better myself. My reasons is that it changed the way network television looks at its shows, and finally began to understand what the writers do. It also sparked a few "copy cat" programs, some good some bad, but the idea was about telling an intricate story, usually sci-fi or fantasy, over a set period of time that is designed to come to an end (just like Japanese Anime has been.) For me this is and the advent of the so called mega-movie structured shows has made TV enjoyable again. I really believe we are in a golden age of TV right now, but it won't last.
As far as books go, well I'm at a disadvantage here. I spent most of this decade working on an English degree. Ask any English major how many books they read that they wanted to, especially if its contemporary. Actually I read one novel for a class. It was a Lit Crit class and just for shits and giggles we randomly chose a NY Times Best Seller, "Bel Canto" by Ann Patchett, and the class applied different literary critical theory on just to see if theory can apply to any novel. (If you're wondering it worked.) So my point is I only really read a handful of fiction but a shitload of non fiction on my own time. This was a tough decision for me but I've boiled it down to Michael Chabon's "The Amazing Kavalier and Clay." Chabon created a mythical look at the beginnings of the comic book industry in 1930's New York that is incredibly engrossing and a blast. You can actually hear the sounds and smell the fumes of the old city. You know you read a good book when you get to the finale and you're depressed because it has ended. It was one of those books I couldn't wait to get home and dive into it. OK, honorary mention: J. K. Rowlings's Harry Potter series. (Like I said this was a hard decision to make.) What was supposed to be a children's book turned out to a revolution in young adult literature. I knew more adults reading this than kids. But then again I really don't hang around any kids. As an English major I really appreciated not only Harry's growth as a character over the series but Rowling's growth as a writer as the series progressed. Can't think of any time in literature where the audience grew up along with the character as the writer grew into her craft. Bravo. Fifty years from now they'll have Harry Potter classes in English departments in Universities. Oh yeah last note on books read this decade, the best book I read, period, was Orwell's "1984" but that was written in 1948 so it doesn't count. However, it was a thrill to read during the Bush administration.
All right on to music. The music scene for me sucked. End of story. I started out the decade listening to "classic rock'' and metal. But eventually Jen got me into the Industrial scene. Love this stuff but lets face it, its mostly ear candy that you can dance to. Not complaining though, thats why I've been listing to it, as an escape mechanism. Besides the club scene that comes with it is way cool. With that said though I can't walk away from this without talking about 300 pound gorilla in the room, iTunes and the iPod. When Apple first came out with iTunes in the nineties for me it was kind of useless, unless I was using it rip mixed CDs (or "borrowing music.") Hard Drives weren't big enough for the collection I could have had (presently I have over a 100 GB of music, mostly from my CD collection.) But when the iPod came out I saw huge potential with it. Most people saw a device that just played music and couldn't figure it out. What no PDA or email? I saw the ability to carry my music collection with me. All the time. The stereo in my car already had an AUX jack which was originally designed so you can hook up a tape version of a Walkman (remember those?) as the stereo had just a CD player. When I got my first iPod, which I still have and it works still, they only worked on a Mac. So when I roamed around campus there were very few of the white earphone cords around. I remember in one of my classes when I sat down and pulled the buds out of my ears I had a crowd around me. "What the hell is that?" "Is that one of those Pod things?" It wasn't too long that Apple opened the party to PC users. Using iTunes playlist and shuffle settings completely changed the way I listen to music. I began to rediscover my old collections. I listened to albums I haven't listened to in years. When the iTunes Music Store opened I began buying a lot of those old singles that you can't get anymore, without purchasing an entire album. Plus I had the bonus of being able to songs I would have never brought up to the register in a record store (don't lie we all have done it on iTunes.) So what does this all have to do with the the price of tea in China. Nothing really. I'm just pointing out that this decade the music industry took a hit and the way we consume music and use it changed forever. It doesn't matter whether you listen to Pop, Hip Hop, Rock, Metal or Indy Rock (whatever the fuck that genre is) legal digital downloads became a reality and having over a thousand songs in your pocket, car or even on your phone is no longer a thing of science fiction. How fucking cool is that?
Well thats my list. Feel free to comment and agree or disagree.
Technorati Tags:
Books, Harry Potter, iPod, iTunes, Lord of The Rings Trilogy, Lost, Movies, Music, Television, The Amazing Kavalier and Clay, The Wire, Best of The Deacade
Posts
