Six People Who Defined the Decade
By Joe Boden
22nd December 2009

In case you hadn’t noticed the four hundred top however many films of the decade lists that have been popping all over the world wide interwebs recently, here is an announcement for you; we are around a week away from the end of the noughties. I’m currently working on my top fifty of the decade and my top ten of the year, so I’ll hold off on posting those until I see the last of the awards baiters in the new year, but for now I think it’s safe to launch a column I’ve been very much looking forward to writing over the past couple of months; the faces that defined the decade.

The point of this column, in case the title doesn’t make it obvious, is to pick six of the most important names and faces in the filmic world over the past ten years. Unfortunately, I wanted to keep this down to the bare minimum, so there are obviously a lot of very important people who I’ve had to leave out. So bare minimum, in fact, that I’ve chosen to concentrate on only actors and directors, and to leave out the dozens of screenwriters, composers, cinematographers and the like who do indeed deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the six people listed here. Unfortunately, that was a necessity in order to keep this column from becoming an indulgent mess, and although it’s probably still a mess, I won’t let it be an indulgent one. But why six, I hear you ask? A slightly random number, indeed, but it’s a number that picked itself. I’ve decided to select two actors, two actresses, and two directors, who I believe have been at the very pinnacle of their game over the past ten years. And to keep the pretentiousness of the column to a minimum, each subgroup will be divided into one English-language name, and one world cinema name.

And so, on to the selections, and what better place to start with than the best Hollywoodian actor of the decade. This was, perhaps, the most difficult of the selections to make. Whilst the other five almost chose themselves, I found myself going back and forth through a handful of names. Brad Pitt was a possibility, but produced just as many poor performances (“Inglorious Basterds”, “Mr and Mrs Smith”, the Oceans sequels) as good ones (“The Assassination of Jesse James”, “Burn After Reading”). Christian Bale had an otherwise stellar decade ruined by his 2009 output, namely “Public Enemies” and “Terminator: Salvations”, which were average at best. Johnny Depp, Leonardo di Caprio, Sean Penn… all names that came and went. However, there was one actor who never strayed too far from the front of the public and critical eye for the entire decade, and in a very understated manner has gone from nothing to one of the most respected actors in Hollywood.

Obviously, I’m talking about Viggo Mortensen, the man who shot to fame in the year 2001 as Aragorn in the much anticipated “The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring”. As a late replacement, Mortensen threw himself into the role with all kinds of gusto, and became one of the true successes of the series. There are a handful of actors who came out of “The Lord of the Rings” well off financially in terms of future prospects, including Orlando Bloom – who will be set for life thanks to his pretty boy looks – and Elijah Wood, but only one of the stars has gone on to be considered as one of our finest actors, and that’s Mortensen. He concluded the LOTR series with two further cracking performances in “The Two Towers” and “The Return of the King”, bringing Aragorn from a lonely ranger to a regal king, before going from strength to strength.

2004 saw the release of “Hidalgo”, the action adventure film that didn’t see Mortensen stretch himself too much. Still, it was an entertaining romp through the Sahara desert, and Mortensen was indeed one of the best things about it. It would be 2005, though, which would be an important year for the man. Of course, I’m talking about the release of “a History of Violence”, which was not only a great film in its own right, but also a great performance, with Mortensen portraying the every man as well as it has been done this decade. It’s also an important film thanks to the effect it had on Viggo’s career trajectory, with a strong bond being formed between the actor and director David Cronenburg. This continued in 2007, with the release of “Eastern Promises”, which was a slightly lacklustre film but featured one of Viggo’s best performances, and earned the actor an Oscar nomination.

Viggo Mortensen in his Oscar nominated role as Nikolai in "Eastern Promises"

Mortensen continues to impress, with “Appaloosa” – which reunited Mortensen with “A History of Violence” cast mate Ed Harris – being one of the true surprises of 2008. What’s more, “The Road” is one of my most anticipated films of this year, not only because of Mortensen’s presence, but also because of Nick Cave and Warren Ellis’s.

As far as world cinema actors go, I don’t think it’s possible to look past Gael Garcia Bernal, the Mexican actor who is probably best known as the third star – behind Blanchette and Pitt – in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu’s “Babel”. However, anybody who has looked even an inch further than this will know that Bernal’s acting credits are plentiful and, indeed, impressive. Three further great performances can be found in “The Science of Sleep” (2006, Michael Gondry), “Y tu Mama Tambien” (2001, Alfonso Cuaron), and “Amores Perros” (2000, Inarritu), but his best two turns came back to back in 2004.

The fist of these is “Bad Education”, for which Bernal took on three roles under the able hand of Pedro Almodovar. The film features a winding, twisting plot that never truly resolves itself, but always remains thoroughly engaging, and that’s mostly down to the fantastic Bernal. His performance here is up there with the very best of his work, at times comedic, at times dramatic, but always superbly measured. He would, though, go on to match – and some would say – better it, as a young Ernesto Che Guevara, in “The Motorcycle Diaries”. Walter Salles’ tale of Che pre-communism is deeply effecting on both a political and emotional level, and – again – Bernal is at the very forefront of the film. He’s on screen for the vast majority of its generous runtime, and over the course of two hours Bernal conjures up a finely measured performance that is up there with the best we’ve seen this decade.

Moving onto the females, we’ll kick off with my pick for the best English Language actress over the past ten years. Perhaps a tiny bit of a controversial pick, I’m going to go for Naomi Watts, who has proven time and time again this decade that she can do just about everything in front of a camera. Her first film of the decade, undoubtedly, was her best. Of course, I’m talking about David Lynch’s “Mulholland Drive”, which is a dizzying and surreal mystery film which plunge’s Watts’ Betty into the very depths of despair and depression. Her performance is unrivalled amongst American actresses over the last ten years, enveloping everything from a starry eyed hopeful actress to a suicidal, down-trodden, desperate woman obsessed with an unattainable goal. It’s truly a superb performance of epic proportions, spanning the spectrum of human emotions whilst never feeling overwhelming or alienating.

Admittedly, my choice of Watts for this not-at-all-prestigious award is mainly down to her performance in “Mulholland Drive”, but to say that is all she’s done this decade would be silly. She’s almost-equally as great in “21 Grams” (2003), a film which – again – puts her through an emotional whirlwind. “Rabbits” (2002), again by Lynch, is a short film that is comprised of the surreal ‘rabbit’ sitcom in “INLAND EMPIRE”, and features an eerily voiced Watts at her deadpan best. Another horror, “The Ring” (2002) brought her to wide-spread public attention, and she is just about the best thing about that entire franchise. “King Kong” (2005) was one of the best blockbusters of the decade, and her superb physical performance was one of the highlights. And “I Heart Huckabees” (2004) was one of the surprise comedic masterstrokes of the last five years.

Naomi Watts with Jude Law in David O Russell's "I Heart Huckabees"

Two more performances towards the end of the decade cemented her position as one of the best actresses of her generation. “Eastern Promises” (2007) hardly pushed her to the level of, say, “Mulholland Drive” or “21 Grams”, but proved an enjoyable romp through the London criminal underground, and although she’s outclassed at every turn by Viggo Mortensen, she gives a good representation of herself. Later that year, though, she would prove the best thing about the American re-make of Michael Haneke’s “Funny Games”, turning in an immensely committed performance as a woman frightened for her own life and for the life of her children. It’s scary how much Watts plunges herself into the role, but the result is well worth the effort. As it stands, Watts’ most high profile project of next decade is a re-make of “The Birds”, Hitchcock’s classic horror-thriller, and if there’s one actress who you can trust with such source material, it’s certainly Watts.

Moving on to our world cinema woman of the decade, I’ve decided to go with another choice that could be construed as ‘safe’ or ‘predictable’. But whatever, because Isabelle Huppert is one of the greatest living actresses, English language or otherwise, and it’s been yet another great decade for a great woman. Not only did she co-star with Watts in David O Russell’s comedy “I Heart Huckabees”, which I named earlier this year as the best comedy of the decade, but she was one of the best things about it. Her semi-pretentious self-help guru is the perfect character for Huppert to play, and her deadpan comic delivery complements the films quasi-philosophical script wonderfully. Her most critically acclaimed performance of the decade was in Haneke’s “The Piano Teacher” (2001), and it is indeed superb, but I’m going to take this opportunity to talk a little bit about her other, more underrated Haneke collaboration.

Of course, I’m talking about “The Time of the Wolf” (2003), Haneke’s post-apocalyptic dystopian art film which sees Huppert play the matriarch of a depleting family. It’s a fantastic performance in a film which I think is Haneke’s best (maybe discounting “The White Ribbon”), and her subtle but devastating delivery is second to none. She plays a woman who is not only fighting for her own life, but one who is striving to keep safe two children in a world where nothing is set in stone, and nothing is certain. The film does lose it slightly towards the end, where social unrest takes centre stage over the anxiety, nervousness, and tension inhabited the first half, but Huppert’s exquisite performance never goes below her usual gold standard. It wasn’t just three films that embodied her output of the decade, though. “Home” (2008), for instance, is a very good film – one of the ten best of the year in fact – and Huppert is as good as ever. She’s also active on the festival front, and her input into the Cannes film festival this decade has been invaluable.

The best English Language director was slightly harder to decide upon. I toyed with the idea of including Joel Coen, simply because he’s come off the back of a bad streak (“Intolerable Cruelty” and “The Ladykillers”) to craft three of the best films of his career (“No Country for Old Men”, “Burn After Reading” and “A Serious Man”). Maybe Shane Meadows? Again, one bad film (“Once Upon a Time in the Midlands”) blemishes an otherwise stellar record. Similarly, Mendes made “Jarhead”, Fincher “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”, and Tarantino “Death Proof”. And then it hit me. If there’s one director who I’ve enjoyed everything from this decade, it’s one Wes Anderson.

He kicked things off which a characteristically high standard, his best some might say, in “The Royal Tenenbaums” (2001). It’s a film about a dysfunctional family which is forced to re-convene, and which finds common ground amidst the ensuing chaos. Not only is it an expertly crafted film in its own right, but it’s a tour de force from Anderson. He directs with frenetic brilliance, never allowing sense or reason to come in between him and the comedy, and continuing to form the style that he set the groundwork for in the 1990s with “Bottle Rocket” (1996) and “Rushmore” (1998). “The Royal Tenenbaums” continues these key Anderson traits, creating some fantastic visual humour (Ben Stiller’s Chaz and his two young boys inexplicably wear the same red tracksuit), some running gags that rely almost entirely on quirk (the mice that trawl around the house at random intervals), and – what is now considered the Wes hallmark – the perfectly timed ‘long pause’, where a character will refrain from speaking for a few seconds, partly to heighten the tension and partly for quirk. It helps, too, that he recruited a superb cast, including the aforementioned Stiller, Gene Hackman, Luke Wilson, Gwyneth Paltrow, and future constant collaborators Bill Murray and Owen Wilson.

Wes Anderson with two of his "Darjeeling Limited" stars, Adrien Brody and Jason Schwartzman.

Murray and Wilson (Owen, that is) would team up with Anderson again to make his next film, “The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou”. Anderson continued some of the traits set up in his first three films, but “The Life Aquatic” is no doubt his most beautiful film to date. Particularly the ending, where Murray and his crew finally come face to face with what they have been hunting, and are unable to confront it because of its sheer beauty. Accompanied by the immense Sigur Ros, the scene is tinged with Anderson’s trademark quirk, but has an air of universality about it that extends itself to all imaginable audiences. “The Darjeelining Limited” followed, which may actually be his worst film t date, but still one that strives to be different and inflicts its own personal style on the audience. Starring Owen Wilson along with the brilliant Jason Schwartzman and Adrien Brody, it takes deadpan to a new level, and teaches its characters similar life lessons about the importance of family as other, better Anderson adventures. The director took a step into the mainstream with “The Fantastic Mr Fox” in 2009, but managed to admirably retain his sense of individuality and re-create Roald Dahl’s world in a very Wes Anderson way.

If I had trouble finding a director with an unblemished record in the English language section, I encountered the exact opposite problem in world cinema. There are so many directors who I would love to include here. You’ve probably noticed Michael Haneke’s name pop up time and time again in this column, and he’s a director who I have grown to like more and more over the last few weeks. His films inflict themselves upon the viewer whether they like it or not, and the more you think about his output, the more impressive it becomes. Abbas Kiarostami is another who has impressed, with “Ten”, “Five”, and “ABC Africa” being three of the most individualistic films of the decade. However, I don’t feel I can truly comment on his noughties output without having seen the likes of “10 on Ten” and “Shirin”, and there was one other world cinema director who, I feel, trumps even his output. Aleksandr Sokurov, the protégé of Andrei Tarkovskey, has indeed been second to none, and his résumé more than backs up this statement.

In 2002, Sokurov made what could well be the most famous art film of the decade; “Russian Ark”. Consisting of one, solitary ninety six minute shot, the film entered the record books for playing host to the longest take in cinema history. However, it is more than just a gimmick, and “Russian Ark” remains one of the most engaging films of the last few years. That’s partly down to its intellectual musings, partly down to its surreal humour, and partly down to Sokurov’s exquisite direction. He turns even the most mundane of things into beautiful visuals, and the finale is a feast for the eyes. “Father and Son” was a step down in quality, both from “Russian Ark” and from its predecessor “Mother and Son” (1996), but was still an engaging dramatic film that showed off Sokurov’s skill as both a creator of visuals and a teller of stories.

Issey Ogata as Emperor Hirohito in "the Sun" (2005).

In 2005, though, Sokurov surpassed even “Russian Ark”, and created one of my favourite five films of the decade. I’m talking about “The Sun”, which recounts the final days of Emperor Hirohito’s reign in Japan during World War II. A film about subtlety – both subtlety of cinematic style and the subtlety of its lead character – it could be argued that this is Sokurov’s greatest achievement thus far. That would be, however, to unfairly and flippantly dismiss such classics as “Mother and Son”, “Russian Ark”, “Moloch” and others, but “The Sun” is a film so vibrant with emotion and densely packed with ideas that it transcends conventional narrative to take on its historical setting with both realism and dramatization. Sokurov has said that he was not concerned with the politics of the time and instead wished to create a character study of an interesting, gentile, polite, and misunderstood leader. And that’s what he’s done; with ample support from Issei Ogata as the troubled ‘dictator’, Sokurov created one of the most affecting stories of a misunderstood man that has ever graced our cinema screens.

Sokurov’s story doesn’t end there; “Alexandra” (2007) is yet another revelation, condemning war and its supporters whilst, again, crafting a superb character study. It’s both a look at times gone by and a glance towards the future, and although it doesn’t quite match the genius of “Russian Ark” or “The Sun”, it’s still a film I would whole-heartedly recommend to fans of Sokurov, Tarkovsky, or cinema itself. Sokurov has two more films planned for next decade, “Two Brothers and a Sister” and “Faust”, and he truly is one of the most interesting and exciting auteurs working today.

So there is my six. It’s a list that, I’m sure, many will disagree with, but I don’t think a definitive list could really be drawn up from a public consensus. Those are my selections, and although there are certainly countless actors and directors who would challenge the list if only I got to know them, with my own filmic knowledge these are the six that I hold in the highest regard. It’s interesting that, ten years ago, a few of them were breaking out onto the scene, one had been around for decades, and one was yet to make his filmic debut. Maybe, in ten years time, these six will have made way for some new stars who have risen to the heights of their career, but it’s difficult to know if it will be Emily Blunt or Casey Affleck or Amy Adams who will top my list. I guess I’ll see you in ten years.