2017 Movie Watching Review

Here we go, baby!

I know you've been waiting all year for this. Well, I definitely have. It's time to add up what the hell I watched in 2017. The build-up is incredible. I've put together a formidable list, but it's time to do some hearty analysis.

First off, plain and simple, I managed to watch 224 movies this year. This is barely up from the 220 I watched in 2016, but still trending up from the 198 in 2015. I really can't believe it was that close. Apparently I top off at around 220-ish flicks. That's a movie every 1.6 days, which is about right.

My repeat movies were really down. I only saw two films twice: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) and The Interview (2014). So that's 222 unique films.

Of these 222 movies, I watched 133 for the first time, or 60%, way up from last year's 53%.

Let's start this year breaking it up by medium:

MEDIA:

-->

Method	Number	Percentage
Digital Download	2	0.89%
DVD	17	7.59%
Google Play	1	0.45%
Hulu	1	0.45%
Illegal Download	1	0.45%
Netflix DVD	57	25.45%
Netflix Streaming	74	33.04%
Theater	12	5.36%
TV	55	24.55%
YouTube	4	1.79%

Last year my Netflix Streaming was at a paltry 22.7%, so that's clearly the biggest jump. My TV watching has gone down the most (38% to 24.55%), likely due to the fact that I gave up cable in July. I can't help but think these are the trends. Surprisingly I was at 8% DVD last year, which is dead on. I watched one more film in theaters this year than last year, but similar percentages.

Of the 55 films I watched on Television, here is my channel breakdown:

-->

Channel	Number	Percentage
AMC	4	7.27%
Bravo	2	3.64%
Cartoon Network	1	1.82%
Comedy Central	4	7.27%
ESPN	1	1.82%
Freeform	1	1.82%
FX	10	18.18%
FXX	2	3.64%
Nicktoons	1	1.82%
HBO	2	3.64%
MTV	1	1.82%
Showtime	1	1.82%
Spike	4	7.27%
Starz	2	3.64%
SyFy	10	18.18%
TBS	4	7.27%
TNT	3	5.45%
Vh1	2	3.64%

Besides SyFy and FX, which clearly kills it, this is pretty spread out. The next highest percentage is 7% from TBS, Comedy Central, Spike, and AMC, but that's only a difference of one or two films from the bottom. This is the same as last year, although the polarization was even more dominating. And yes, I watched Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990) on Nicktoons. It...does not hold up.

YEARS:

I always want to get my years up. Obviously, when Netflix Streaming is 33% of my consumption, that makes it tough. I'd like to have a goal next year of diversifying my media. I'd also like a goal of getting at least one film from each year, from about the 70s on. This year I astoundingly missed '71, '72, '75, '78, '79, '80, '86, '91, and '93. How did I miss 1993?! I'm watching Jurassic Park (1993) as soon as I can. But anyway, here's how that shakes out:

-->

Year	Number	Percentage
1931	1	0.45%
1935	1	0.45%
1960	1	0.45%
1961	1	0.45%
1970	1	0.45%
1973	1	0.45%
1974	2	0.89%
1976	1	0.45%
1977	1	0.45%
1981	2	0.89%
1982	2	0.89%
1983	1	0.45%
1984	3	1.34%
1985	1	0.45%
1987	2	0.89%
1988	1	0.45%
1989	1	0.45%
1990	1	0.45%
1992	2	0.89%
1994	2	0.89%
1995	4	1.79%
1996	2	0.89%
1997	2	0.89%
1998	4	1.79%
1999	3	1.34%
2000	5	2.23%
2001	5	2.23%
2002	6	2.68%
2003	4	1.79%
2004	3	1.34%
2005	4	1.79%
2006	9	4.02%
2007	6	2.68%
2008	3	1.34%
2009	9	4.02%
2010	6	2.68%
2011	8	3.57%
2012	10	4.46%
2013	8	3.57%
2014	12	5.36%
2015	15	6.70%
2016	29	12.95%
2017	39	17.41%

The past decade is obviously the most well-represented, with the top five coming from the last six years (2012 over 2013). I'm not too bummed about this, but again, it'd behoove me to watch older shit. Here's the breakdown by decade:

-->

Decade	Number	Percentage
1930s	2	0.89%
1960s	2	0.89%
1970s	6	2.68%
1980s	13	5.80%
1990s	20	8.93%
2000s	54	24.11%
2010s	127	56.70%

Alright, now for some amazing year-to-year stats. In 2016 I watched 15.9% from the current year, so we're a bit higher. The most recent year that I didn't see a movie from was 1982, so that's not great. I actually only saw 12% from the 2000s, so I doubled that. I had much more 90s and 80s flicks (15% and 8% respectively). But I was 58% 2010s at...wait for it...127! Yes, I saw the same number of films from this current decade. I don't know how this happened.

So, superlatives:

Oldest film: Frankenstein (1931)

Most Recent film: Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (12/20/17).

Yeah, that's not great.

Okay, here's some more.

Breakdown by Month:

-->

January	22
April	22
September	20
December	20
May	19
October	19
August	18
November	18
June	18
July	17
February	17
March	14
Average	18.67

There's almost no consistency year to year except for January being heavy and February being light. I dunno.

Let's end with films I've seen year-to-year:

-->

2017 and 2016	2017 and 2015	all three
Bridesmaids	Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens	Fast & Furious 6
A Christmas Story	Bad Boys II	The Interview
Beverly Hills Cop II	Fast & Furious
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story	Frozen
Step Brothers	Gangs of New York
Suicide Squad	Lucy
The LEGO Movie	Mad Max Fury Road
	That's My Boy!
	The Fast and the Furious
	The Matrix
	The Replacements

I don't think I'll keep going back and forth, like in 2018 I'm not going to compare to 2015, that will get out of control. But it IS interesting to note how 2017 has more in common with 2015 than last year. Maybe that's not surprising. More time between movies makes more sense. However, there is no excuse for watching Fast & Furious 6 (2013) three years in a row. I also...apparently really like The Interview. For those keeping track, yes, I watched it twice this year, which makes it four times in three years, more than any other film. I'll admit it's become somewhat of a go-to for me when I don't know what else to do, or if I'm real drunk. I also own it on YouTube, which makes it easy to cast in weird places.

I also want to note that I watched Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) twice last year, and its sequel twice this year. I dig it, I guess.

So, that's it. Now 2018 is upon us. Just imagine next year, when you have more stats to look forward to! For now, we're back to square one. Blank slate. Time to start over. What might we have in store this year? Stay tuned to find out!

Top 10 Films 3.0: 2012-2014

As we did yesterday with years 2009-2011, it's about that time where we re-evaluate our Top Ten film rankings of yesteryear. Attitudes change and some movies hold up better or worse than others over the years. While this is certainly a pointless exercise with no real end year after year, it's definitely a nice way to be reminded of how many good flicks there are out there and an encouragement to see as many as possible. I would postulate that as my tastes have evolved, these latter years won't change that much - based both on their recency matching my current profile and the original lists being more solid and less random and pandering than when I first started this site.

Again, for our first realignment back in 2014, which also holds our first lists, click here!

2012:

The Campaign
The Grey
The Five-Year Engagement
Celeste and Jesse Forever
Life of Pi 
Skyfall
Argo
Zero Dark Thirty
Django Unchained
The Master

When we last met I was but the student

There's only three films that I have retained through the years, four since 2014 which is actually incredible. The Grey has maintained a low spot on the list while Django and The Master have unwaveringly held the top two positions. Other than that I've moved away from the slew of great action films in 2012 like Dredd and Looper in favour of the great comedies like The Five-Year Engagement and Celeste and Jesse Forever. I never thought much of Life of Pi, but it's grown on me, and in terms of big spectacle films I traded The Dark Knight Rises for Skyfall. 2012 is an all-around pretty solid year that I can see switching around quite a bit, while I don't think much can touch those top two giants. Other films like Moonrise Kingdom, Seven Psychopaths, and even Pitch Perfect were tough to leave off, but they're ultimately all too gimmicky. Then again, The Campaign gets the #10 spot as a film that's held up remarkably well as its outrageousness is eclipsed by actual contemporary political campaigns.

2013:

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2
Frozen
Prisoners
12 Years a Slave
The World's End
Pain & Gain
Spring Breakers

Inside Llewyn Davis

The Wolf of Wall Street
Stoker

omg shoes

I really love a list that includes Cloud with a Chance of Meatballs 2 and Prisoners so close to each other. You may have noticed how much I've loved the Phil Lord and Chris Miller films, but I'd argue that the sequel is actually the superior film in many ways. Now, to be sure, my original 2013 list was a total cop-out that just allowed me to list all the films I liked. That's all kind of bullshit. Of the 19 films listed, six remain here. In 2014 I re-ranked and as predicted, the lists are pretty similar, with seven films still cropping up here. The major difference is Stoker, which I just watched and loved, earning it the #1 spot. In future installments I'd be curious if that film's position is tenuous. Other than that this list is crazily similar. Frozen moves from #8 to #9, 12 Years a Slave moves from #6 to #7, and the Top Five largely remain identical besides the downvote of The World's End and the inclusion of Stoker. To be sure, when making the 2017 list I didn't even glance at previous rankings; I literally re-ranked from scratch, which means 2013 is remarkably stable, at least as far as my tastes are concerned. I would like The Lone Ranger to make it someday.

2014:

Interstellar
The LEGO Movie
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Foxcatcher
Snowpiercer
The Interview
Birdman
Gone Girl
Inherent Vice

Under the Skin

Scottish Men only use 10% of their dicks

Some years are weird with titles, like how 2012 has "The" in front of a lot of films. 2014 is all about "In" - Interstellar, Interveiw, Inherent Vice...2014 retains seven from the original list, but in drastically different order, with Under the Skin moving way up and Interstellar moving way down. Birdman I unanimously named my favourite at the time, although it's #4 in 2017. What's more weird is that in 2015 I re-ranked and only five remain from that one just a little over a year ago. Those are basically the Top Four, although I had difficulty leaving John Wick and Dear White People off the list - the former because it's a well-constructed action film that isn't that great of a film, and the latter for just being something that didn't stick with me as much as it did in 2015. Instead, Foxcatcher and Snowpiercer sneak in, both of which I still actively talk and think about.

These ranks ought to be considered Norwegian Morning Wood canon for at least the next three years. I'd be curious to see how anything changes between now and 2020 or if we've somewhat stabilized. We of course JUST ranked 2016 and re-ranked 2015 here, so you may check that out as well. As for the future, we can only guess as to which films rise to prominence, which seem to flash hot then fade, and which barely miss the cut in favour of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2.

First Impressions: The Interview

Now that the controversy has died down and 2014's Version of 9/11 North Korean-style never happened, let'st talk about The Interview (2014). I do have many opinions on the nature of this release and the inherent international controversy it spurred, possibly bringing down a corporate media giant and threatening American democracy and freedom of speech, which you can all read here. Right now, I really just want to talk about the merits of the film itself, and as such, SPOILERS will be lurking everywhere.

Not even one play of "Teenage Dream."

Normally I only chat about movies I have seen in theaters, and as a result, this blog is actually a throbbing living record of every film I've seen at the cinema since 2009. Look at that! I thought that The Interview was a special case, though. If you just got back from Antarctica, The Interview caused a bit of a stir in its real-life subject matter, North Korea, who purportedly sponsored, or at least did nothing to stop, cyber-terrorists from both hacking into SONY and making threats against American movie theaters. After a long, tense couple of days where Obama got involved and I even spoke with representatives from the BBC, SONY released the film in some select theaters along with Video-On-Demand. So, naturally, seeing it the way I did (illegally downloaded once, later bought on YouTube) was the main way of seeing this thing.

The VOD release is of course, huge. It has so far made about $31 million, as of January 4th, with an additional $5 million from its limited theatrical release. We can also estimate around 2 million or so illegal downloads. Which is actually like $20 million additional dollars it could have made in some legal avenue. Is this how we are going to have to measure movies from now on? It's how we always should have to determine a film's true influence and money-making potential - we seem unnaturally obsessive with Box Office, particularly limited to Domestic take.

Yet, until now VOD has always been somewhat inconsequential. Sure there might be a million or two to be made here and there (and lest we remember, if I made a million dollars in one weekend, I'd be set for the rest of my life), but that's never that much compared to a mainstream release's final take. With The Interview, though, this is hugely significant. I've been wanting more films to take this route for years. Why not bypass theaters for a home experience that is better in nearly every way?

I'm not totally anti-cinema. I love the cinema. There's movies like Gravity (2013) or Interstellar (2014) or let's even get into Goodbye to Language 3D (2014) that should only be seen in theaters. These are really all novelty uses of the experience though. There is something to the formality of getting dressed, paying for a ticket, and sitting in the dark with a bunch of real live strangers sharing a communal experience.

At the same time, though, a flick like Snowpiercer (2014) or Why Don't You Play in Hell (2014) won't even play in a theater near me. And I care less about the formality of seeing dumb blockbusters like The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies (2014) in the theater than seeing something that engrosses itself in the medium like Birdman (2014). Jeez, I've really got 2014 on my mind. Anyway, my point is that just like everything else in this world, there's not really a black and white answer. There is a place for theatrical releases and there is a place for VOD. I am more irritated when we ignore the use of technology that can service a population that desires the product and can't get it any other way.

The Interview at once legitimizes the VOD medium, which seems otherwise reserved for what used to be a graveyard for Direct-to-Video, then Direct-to-DVD releases. Time will tell if the extremely extenuating circumstances of The Interview's release is a fluke or the start of a trend. If only it ingratiated a significant chunk of the population into experimenting with on-demand where they had not previously, which makes them more apt towards similar future behavior, I'm satisfied. Again, VOD isn't the best for everyone, but I would love an age where theatrical releases and VOD happen simultaneously. Believe me, I'd rather have sit at home and watched Wrath of the Titans (2012) comfortably by myself than when I saw it alone in theaters one lonely Sunday afternoon. Friends don't always want to see movies with you! Especially shitty ones! The lava man looked cool.

So the great irony is that although The Interview may have set precedent for American stances (or not) on securing artistic freedoms of speech from foreign (or domestic) threats, and could possibly have pushed the interview into new and exciting distribution directions, the film itself is so fucking stupid and silly. And really, not that great.

I will admit a lot of it has grown on me in the weeks since I saw it. And I saw it, of course, Christmas Eve, and then again about a week ago last Monday. I may even see it again, it's on my YouTube. Every time I saw it I was also in a big group, which means the actual eyeballs attached to this thing are probably a bit more inflated than those numbers up there indicate. I would say I averaged about groups of five, which would indicate that 50 million people saw this thing. That seems unlikely. But it was probably a good number.

As far as comedies go, it's not particularly intelligent or gut-bustingly funny. A lot of jokes fall flat, especially in the first twenty minutes of the film (that whole James Franco Sméagol impression defies understanding. The flick picks up once it hits the DPRK, and it is cautious to make fun of the nation's leader more than its people. If anything, though, it shows the evil dictator as too much of a sympathetic likable bro, so that his eventual death is a bit more unnerving. I suppose the assumption here is that you're supposed to remember that he's a maniac who enslaves and oppresses his own people in a systemic totalitarian government that worships him as a god. The Interview drops occasional reminders about this, but it generally really makes us side with the lovable little dumpling, just as he cozies up to James Franco's Dave Skylark.

Franco, by the way, completely saves this movie. I've never seen a comedic actor throw himself more into a role as super-expressive or as dumb as this. He's a revelation in every scene. His appearance on the Razzie nomination shortlist is completely unfounded, but the Razzies honor the "worst" movies of the year exactly like the Oscars honor the "best." It's just a bunch of people griping about really obvious movies so that it doesn't actually come off as mean-spirited, but it's no better than the self-congratulatory ceremony it supposes to parody. Franco is funnier here than any other comedic actor of 2014. Okay, note that difference between "best" and "funniest" again, folks. He just strikes an aggressive sort of timing, idiocy, latent homosexuality, and on-the-mark cultural aphorisms that make this perfect character.

I also love how Rogen plays the straight man to Franco's wackiness here, just like Pineapple Express (2008). It's a bold move as co-director this time around, to give up the far funnier parts to all the people around him, in order to make the best possible movie. It's not something you could ever see Adam Sandler or Jim Carrey doing, and it sort of gives you hope for Rogen's future - that he'll keep evolving and writing roles that suit him, or give up acting entirely, rather than push himself in a direction that's forced or unnatural.

The war will be worth it.

Other subtle highlights include a Shaun of the Dead (2004)-like foreshadowing, one of the better uses of a Katy Perry song in a movie (four times. They play "Firework" FOUR times, folks), and a delicate insight into a dangerous nation-state. The only major problem I have is how Seth Rogen used his magic white man penis to melt the foreign ice queen, which is a staple of a lot of James Bond movies that I can see being subtly parodied here. The Korean chick has her own agency, though, so I dunno. Maybe it's okay. It certainly helped the plot. Like I said, this isn't really intelligent comedy, but it was never trying to be, and the pedestal it found itself on after all the controversy was impossible to reach.

I would recommend The Interview. I will see it again. Maybe this week. I think it is growing on me in way that some other films have done in the past. I hated Anchorman (2004) when I first saw it. I did! I preferred Napoleon Dynamite (2004) at the time, which I also saw alone in theaters. At the very least I don't think we'll forget The Interview any time soon, and if we do, it'll be a sad time for America, the film distribution industry, and James Franco. Or maybe we'll just always think about that flash in the pan Christmas of 2014 as one of the more bizarre Hollywood stories that didn't change shit.

Download today!