United 93

Their list included The Bourne Ultimatum, and, while a good film, it was not United 93. First, United 93 used the same camera work that Ultimatum used, but in a confined space. Greengrass, throwing out everything in the book about how to adapt real life events for film. Rather than make a movie that, in the hands of any other filmmaker would have turned into cheap populism (don’t believe me? watch this movie and World Trade Center) and instead made a gritty, intense thriller. He did not invent the shaky-cam, or the docudrama style of filmmaking. Hell, he didn’t even bring it to the mainstream. Peter Berg did with Friday Night Lights. However, I suspect that in the future ‘true story’ films will aspire to me more like this film, and, as such, more like reality.

The Iron Giant

As tempting as it was to put a Pixar film in this list, as far as actual storytelling The Iron Giant is the only choice. While a flop at the box office, the film was enough to convince Pixar to hire Brad Bird and reminded us all that animated films could tell complex stories to children. Without The Iron Giant, we may have never got Finding Nemo or Wall-E. While these stories may not be as successful as a Toy Story or a Shrek at the box office, they will likely be classics long after the Ice Age movies are a distant memory.

The Blair Witch Project

It seems odd that /film missed this one, as they seemed to focus on the most superficial aspects of movie making. Their justification for including The 40 Year Old Virgin and Rushmore highlight this. However, you’d think they’d note the change in the way movies, and, well, damn near everything is marketed by The Blair Witch Project. First off, the film was a story told in a way that was not usually seen (as has been copied sense– including Quarantine and Cloverfield in 2008 alone), but it also marketed itself in a way that made it a surprise hit. It is, and probably will always be the most successful cost to profit movie of all time.

Boys Don’t Cry

Over the last ten years the portrayal of gays on screen has gone from a rare and somewhat controversial exploration to something of commonplace, and this movie has to be one of the major reasons for that. While gay characters have always existed in cinema (watch The Maltese Falcon again), they were rarely main characters and almost never treated with the depth given to Brandon in this movie. Unlike In and Out and the Birdcage, this film was no joking matter, and unlike Philadelphia it didn’t have a straight character to balance out the leads. Would serious introspective looks at the gay lifestyle like Capote, Milk, Kinsey or Brokeback Mountain exist without Boys Don’t Cry?

Man on the Moon

I would be a fool to suggest Man on the Moon is the first bio-pic ever produced, and therefor it’s hard to make an absolute case that it started a trend–that began shortly after it was released–of bio-pics. You could easily go with 1998’s Gods and Monsters, 1996’s The People vs. Larry Flynt or even 1994’s Ed Wood as movies that allowed serious filmmakers to use modern figures as biopics. However, I suggest that Man on the Moon showed a shift from telling the story of a persons life to recreating that person onscreen. Jim Carrey went to such great lengths to convince us he was Andy Kaufman, all but transforming himself in the process. Yes, I am suggesting that Jim Carrey (along with Russell Crowe in The Insider) paved the way for Jamie Foxx in Ray and Philip Seymour Hoffman in Capote.

X2: X-Men United

Sure, superhero movies have been around since the late 1970s, but the second X-Men movie was probably the first superhero movie that functions better as an actual story than as a device for action set-pieces. Unlike the first movie in the series, and all the other superhero movies before it, this movie sets out to explore what makes us heroes and what makes us villains. The good guys aren’t squeaky clean and the bad guy is sympathetic. The actions of everyone in the movie are fully explained and logical, which is hard enough to do when don’t have to deal with superpowers. But this movie is at it’s best–it’s absolute best–when it is not an action movie, but when it is exploring the characters, such as Wolverine’s quest to find out his past or Bobby the “Iceman” must explain he’s a mutant to his family–or Pyro’s choice to join Magneto. In the end the film is about choices, not about shit blowing up. Without X2, it seems unlikely that we would have Batman Begins or The Dark Knight, and Iron Man would probably have been a bit cheekier.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

First off, the movie was a cultural movement back to geekdom. It is not the amazing look of the film, the return to epic film making or the revitalization of fantasy that brings this movie onto the list. Many of those have never left and some were in place before the first in the series was released. However, the first installment of the series makes the final cut for two reasons: The way it was shot and special effects. The trilogy was shot all at once, with a huge upfront investment. While not unheard of (Back to the Future II and III were shot at the same time, and Superman I and II were planned to be), it was the first film in several years to do so, a move that was eventually repeated by the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, and soon the Harry Potter franchise as well. Finally, the film was the first to convincingly have a major character played by CGI, though he was hidden for most of this film. But the cinematic breakthrough that is most likely to be used again is the technology that was developed by WETA for the massive battle scenes, which simulated entire battles without specific actions needed to be programmed.

28 Days Later

It would have been easy to put Saw, for the influx of torture porn that has taken over theaters, or The Sixth Sense for the trend of twist endings we saw in the early 2000s, but neither of those will have a long term impact on film making. Partially because producers haven’t learned the lessons from Saw (that people actually do want something to think about in horror movies, sometimes) and have all but abandoned the twist ending (because you can see better ones every week on ‘24′ and ‘LOST’). 28 Days Later, with it’s dark tone and lack of hope has been something that has dominated movies since September 11th. While perhaps not the first example of this in a Post-9/11 world, it is the one I would site as starting the trend full-on.

Being John Malkovich

The /film article cited Rushmore as starting a wave of Wes Anderson like movies, but I haven’t seen any. I have, however, slowly seen a trend of Spike Jonze/Charlie Kaufman-esque movies coming along.The difference between Wes Anderson and Spike Jonze is mostly in style. Both are non-traditional storytellers who deal with bizarre and quirky characters. However, Anderson’s unique brand of storytelling is hard to imitate and perhaps impossible to get right. I’m not sure anyone fully understands an Anderson film except Anderson. While this is fun for some, I understand it can be a turn off. Jonze, meanwhile, focuses more on the Id than Anderson’s Ego focused movies. Jonze wants to explore what it is to be human, and combines that with stunning visuals. Also, Jonze was one of the first directors to make the leap from music videos to motion pictures, a trend which has only increased following his success.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall

This is a personal one for me, and I figured there was no better way to close the list. No, it’s not on here for reintroducing the penis as a punchline. There have been plenty of other movies to do that of late. Sarah Marshall in on here for one reason and one reason alone: It saved the Muppets. Among comedy film makers today, I doubt many, if any, can honestly say that the Muppets had nothing to do with their path to Hollywood. Before this movie was made, the Muppets were close to death. The last three movies had been awful, and more importantly lacking the magic that the original movies had. Thanks to Forgetting Sarah Marshall’s puppet subplot, and a chance meeting with the heads of Jim Henson’s Workshop, talented people (Jason Segal and Nick Stoller) are behind the Muppets once again. If anyone can save the series, it’s them.

Coming up with recent movies that have had major influence is not an easy task, so maybe we should cut /film a little slack. As you’ll note, more than half the films listed came out in or around 1999. I think that a little more time making a case for some of the films might have helped. Hopefully this was a worthwhile compliment and a decent second take at the topic.

So, what did I miss? What did /film get right? Will Jason Segal and Nick Stoller save the Muppets? Sound off below.