1. Letters From Iwo Jima -- Top Movies of the Decade
Hollywood has been making war movies since D.W. Griffith, but you seldom if ever get a sense of how it feels. You may in the first 20 minutes of Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan"; then that movie reverts to genre form. But Clint Eastwood's "Letters From Iwo Jima" accomplishes this feat: You get war in all its horror, boredom and grit--and from the point of view of our country's enemy, so any empathy is hard-earned. With unsettling brilliance, the film captures war as experienced by soldiers lost in its fog, as a grinding, sickening, numbing death machine. In Eastwood's version, heroism and cowardice are two sides of the same coin, and glory a concept best left to generals and historians.
![]() | ![]() |


This list is awful. Even for an insider in the world of international releases, this is an obscure and irrelevant list.
Posted by: ronald bronberg | November 23, 2009 at 08:34 AM
Ron, how can you not agree with Iwo Jima? That is a great film noquestion
Posted by: Ron Bron Wrong | November 23, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Two glaring ommissions: Brockeback Mountain and Juno!
Posted by: Wickedlycool | November 23, 2009 at 12:39 PM
Oh dear, these lists are still so useless... Why put numbers against movies, instead of just offering it as 10 movies you think your readers may have missed but should have seen...
Posted by: shann | November 23, 2009 at 01:34 PM
can't believe-'' the pan's labyrinth'' is not in the list....
Posted by: kiril | November 23, 2009 at 02:29 PM
What about Mulholland Drive, In The Mood For Love, Yi Yi, Eternal Sunshine, There will be blood, Spirited Away or any Pixar?
Bad list... sorry
http://www.theyshootpictures.com/21stcentury_allfilms.htm
Posted by: Alexis | November 24, 2009 at 03:04 AM
This list & writer are trying to be a little too "smart for the room."
Posted by: Jerome | November 24, 2009 at 09:24 AM
No Broke Back Mountain, Boys Don't Cry, Million Dollar Baby, Iron Man, The Departed, Ray, The Pursuit of Happyness, The Dark Knight or any of the Lord of Ring movies?
I know this column was on the high brow end of films, but the movies I mentioned were fantatic works of art that resonated with audiences.
Just because a movie makes a lot of money does not mean it can not be considered one of the decade's best.
Kevin Lockett
www.twitter.com/kevinlockett
www.twitter.com/lockettmedia
www.soul88.blogspot.com
www.lockettmedia.moonfruit.com
Posted by: Kevin Lockett | November 24, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Quite possibly the most pretentious and useless list I have ever seen
Posted by: Roman Pax | November 24, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Some good movies on the list, but the greatest? Harder to say. For a top 10, maybe it'd be better to do one for domestic releases and one for foreign.
What about Zodiac? Children of Men? The Incredibles? The Station Agent? Viggo Mortensen's work with David Cronenberg in Eastern Promises and A History of Violence also deserves a special little shout-out. Still, some good movies on the list. A fun topic to debate.
Posted by: Daniel Carlson | November 24, 2009 at 12:38 PM
obscure, useless, this should have been here, but not this one, bla bla...
people commenting here are clueless..
nice list, great decade.
Posted by: ibsen | November 24, 2009 at 07:18 PM
Reads like someone is trying to show how highbrow they are, instead of a useful list.
Posted by: elaine | November 24, 2009 at 08:22 PM
If you find this list to be "high-brow," I'm assuming that means you haven't seen most of these films.
But instead of whining, why don't you watch them first and THEN form your opinion??
This is a brilliant list, Mr. Honeycutt. I don't agree with 'Letters' being on top, but I do recognize the film as a staggering achievement. Every film on the list is a masterpiece in some form or another (though I personally did not ultimately love 'Far From Heaven'), and it's refreshingly untarnished by "popular" choices or films that pander to a more mainstream point of reference.
Well done!
Posted by: Adam M. | November 24, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Also:
My #1 would be 'City of God.' But I think Kirk Honeycutt had a more tepid take on that film.
Posted by: Adam M. | November 24, 2009 at 10:24 PM
United 93 is a TERRIBLE movie. It's almost as bad as World Trade Center (one of the worst movies EVER). People making money off of misfortune... shame.
Posted by: Conner | November 25, 2009 at 02:24 PM
Not suprised with the top 10 worst movies being compared to their box office and the top 10 just held to your so called standards of great movie making !
Posted by: Dave | November 26, 2009 at 09:07 AM
Just because no one's ever heard of a movie doesn't make it good.
Posted by: thislistispretentious | November 26, 2009 at 05:26 PM
Horrible. Atrocious list.
Posted by: hello | November 26, 2009 at 05:32 PM
Ive only seen 3 of those and none of them would be in my top 10. But to each their own.
Posted by: Fresh | November 26, 2009 at 07:13 PM
United 93 sucked.
Just cos it's based on the saddest day in America's last decade doesn't make it a good movie.
Posted by: Now Honor Bill's Garden | November 26, 2009 at 07:41 PM
Honestly, maybe the worst top 10 list I have ever seen.
Posted by: Zack | November 26, 2009 at 07:45 PM
I loved Letters from Iwo Jima, and I liked No Country For Old Men. I am not familiar with most of the other films.
Posted by: Allan | November 26, 2009 at 09:00 PM
this list is horrible. it is totally a critic's type of list and what's worse it's a critic who only watches artsy movies list. worst list ever and will not be reading this blog again.
Posted by: mike | November 26, 2009 at 10:03 PM
This is one of the most considered and thoughtful best-of-decade lists I have yet seen. Although I don't agree with all of your picks--while both great, "Letters from Iwo Jima" and "United 93" would not make my personal list--your arguements are intelligent and concise. My hat is off to you. And to everybody who is trashing the author simply because they have not seen all of the films, I must ask, when did intelligence become something to be derided? I cannot believe that anybody would complain that a film critic would write a "critic's type of list." Critics get paid to critique. That is their job. Maybe the people who would try to tear down this list should see some of the films before they judge. Oh, and lastly, I'd like to suggest my personal pick for film of the decade: Gus Van Sant's "Elephant." Masterful.
Posted by: Zachary | November 26, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Jesus, can we just drop 'no country for old men?' not only was it not the best film of the decade, or of 2007, it wasn't even the best film about violence and/or the american west of that year - that would be 'there will be blood,' if we're talking just about american films, and this was in many ways is a much much more honest and accomplished movie. 'no country' yes has great sound design, high production values, great editing, etc. but that doesn't prevent it from being a small movie in the worst sense; it's limited in scope, yet not terribly intimate either. It says absolutely NOTHING revelatory about violence other than that it sounds super neato when coming out of silenced shotguns and that murder scenes can perfectly shot and edited, but still be nothing more than that.
Posted by: Kevin | November 27, 2009 at 05:33 AM