Today I was able to see two of the best movies of 2007 back to back. It’s not the first time I’ve seen either film, so I knew what I was in for.
I first saw Jason Reitman’s Juno at the Toronto Film Festival in September. I called the film “this year’s Little Miss Sunshine” and gushed how the movie was “the best film of the year so far.” And then last month, I had the awesome opportunity to attend the first public advance screening of Paul Thomas Anderson’s There Will Be Blood. I loved the film so much that it made me rethink my previous statement. I left the screening wondering if Anderson’s Blood was a better movie than Juno, and waited for the day that I could revisit both films to give a definitive opinion on the matter. And that’s what happened today. It was a steel cage match between the two best films of the year.
There Will Be Blood is the type of film that makes me remember why I once wanted to become a filmmaker. It’s so restrained, yet miraculously calculated. There are moments in this film which will be studied by NYU students for the next 50 years. Daniel Day-Lewis’ performance is unmatched in recent years. And Radiohead’s Johnny Greenwood gives the most interesting musical score in years. Yet, Blood is not easy to watch. It times out at almost three hours, follows one of the most unlikable characters in cinematic history, and features an ending that might turn most mainstream audiences off. Yet it’s a near perfect film.
Juno is the type of film that makes me remember back to my first wonderful experiences staring up at the big screen. It is the type of movie that makes you want to pick up the phone and tell all your friends to buy a ticket. That’s probably why I’ve annoyed you guys for the last couple months, passing along video clips, photos, and anything else I could show you. Diablo Cody’s screenplay is fresh and new, snappy and pop culture obsessed. Cody perfectly captures the voice and characters of the facebook/blogger generation. And if Juno isn’t nominated for best original screenplay than I won’t even watch the award show. Ellen Page’s performance is likely to earn her nominations and much acclaim, but the truth is… She is Juno. America will fall in love with this girl. Director Jason Reitman channels Bottle Rocket/Rushmore era Wes Anderson, while adding his own unique feel to the cinematic mix. And the soundtrack is unmatched, a combination of great tunes headlined by Kimya Dawson and The Moldy Peaches.
So which film is better?
There Will Be Blood or Juno?
Which is the Best Movie of the Year?
Before I give you my pick, I would like the say that regardless, both of these films deserved to be seen on the big screen on opening weekend. Seek out these movies, because this is the best it gets. That said…
I fell in love with Juno again.
I feel like a high school kid who must embarrassingly express his uncontainable feelings to his crush, or else he will likely explode from the emotion that just can not be obtained. That is how I feel about this film. You must see Juno. Juno is everything a good movie should be. It’s both fun and dramatic. Not one bad performance from an all star cast. It’s accessible to anyone and everyone, yet it’s not bubble gum. It’s smart, and it has a lot of heart. I called Juno “this year’s Little Miss Sunshine”, but truth is, it’s a much better film, and transcends that comparison.
I’m not going to tell you to buy a ticket to this film, because Juno deserves more than just your ten bucks. Call your friends, family, myspace/facebook buddies, post on yelp, submit on digg, arrange a meet-up on meetup.com, twitter and pounce while posting an open invite on craigslist.
Juno hits theaters on December 5th (limited). There Will Be Blood hits theaters on December 26th (limited).
November 29th, 2007 at 2:35 am
I was able to watch Juno today in a film class for the first time and had remembered seeing on here that you said it was your favorite movie of the year, so I came into the screening with much anticipation. So as not to keep this long.. I’ll just get to the point. I thought it was pretty awful. Now let me preface this with my favorite types of movies usually involve Michael Mann and some sort of heist or Christopher Nolan and an incredibly intense and dark story, so this movie is definitely not the style of movie which I usually like.
As the movie progressed I couldn’t help but think that Juno had fallen into this new category of movies that seems more concerned with the soundtrack and trying to be witty and less concerned with story and actual substance. The dialog was probably the worst part of the movie. I don’t know if it’s some sort of Napolean Dynamite effect or what but when your main characters CONSTANTLY talk in gibberish (when I saw Rainn Wilson at the beginning of the movie say “That ain’t no etch-a-sketch. That’s one doodle that can’t be un-did, homeskillet.” I laughed but little did I realize the rest of the movie would be spoken in that particular vernacular) I can’t help but think that the writer would sit their for blocks of times concerned with how best to ‘cleverly’ write the next sentence. The soundtrack had the exact same affect that the dialog had, all I could think about was the person behind the film trying to be artistic.
Throughout the entire film.. the only thing I enjoyed was the storyline of Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman simply because their acting was convincing and their dialog and story was based in what I like to call, reality. I was disappointed to learn that this was crafted by the filmmaker behind Thank You For Smoking because that film was incredibly sharp and humorous, something that didn’t seem to translate to Juno.
Maybe I’m just a stick in the mud and I can’t think clearly about the movie because of the overwhelming feeling I had to roll my eyes during the film but I just didn’t really enjoy it.
Something tells me however that I will enjoy There Will Be Blood immensely, however.
November 29th, 2007 at 4:26 am
Freddie,
There is obviously nothing I can write that will change your mind. And I know saying “But… everyone else loved it†isn’t a great argument, but it may prove your “stick in the mud†theory. :)
Juno is currently standing at an 8.7 rating with over 1,000 votes on IMDb (52% of the votes are 10/10!!). And critically the movie is EXTREMELY HIGH with a 95% on Rotten Tomatoes.
I think most people who see this film will LOVE IT.
November 29th, 2007 at 4:48 am
I don’t know what it is about the film but I just didn’t like it. I didn’t really enjoy Little Miss Sunshine the first time I saw it either and think it’s a good film now so maybe I’ll change but it just rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe I just didn’t have the the right mindset going into it.. I rolled out of bed, walked to class and the GTA said our professor was sick so here watch this film Juno and just flipped it on and I was like… Juno? Wow. Ok.
But like I said, the saving grace of this film for me was when it involved Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman’s character. The scene where Juno comes over and leaves unhappy because of the revelation that Bateman makes was probably the scene I enjoyed most because it felt like I was watching a real movie and not this zanny pretentious thing. This is the type of film that I’d expect a girl straight out of NY film school to make.
Shit.. I’m sounding like an asshole now.
November 29th, 2007 at 4:55 am
For what it’s worth I will say however that it’s very well made, filmed, acted, etc. And I can easily say that fans of films like Little Miss Sunshine will certainly enjoy it.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:03 am
It is a contest between Style and Substance. The first poster was absolutely correct. Juno is following a now well-worn template for “indie” successs. It’s the pinnacle of fill-in-the-blanks “quirky.” Which I can’t believe people still fall for. Nobody wants to tell the Emperor he has no clothes on I suppose. Juno is safe, saccharine-coated pop bubble-gum, whereas There Will be Blood is three course steak dinner. But then there’s no accounting for taste either.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:07 am
Haven’t seen either of these but what about No Country for Old Men? Do you think that belongs in this conversation? I do look forward to seeing these two though.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:11 am
I’m excited to see both of these films, though part of me is excited to see Jason Bateman and Michael Cera together again.
May I also suggest that perhaps No Country For Old Men should also be included in this? It really is a spectacular film.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:23 am
I think Juno may be a surprise hit at the BO, but I don’t think Blood will fair so well with mainstream audiences. Having seen both and a multitude of other wonderful films this year I don’t think it’s fair to call these two the front runners, I would - as previous commenters have suggested - include No Country, as well as Superbad (I’m not joking, this is my #1).
November 29th, 2007 at 11:45 am
Haven’t seen Juno, but honestly how good could it be? Don’t get me wrong I’m sure it’s written beautifully, but anything Jason Reitman does will most likely only be notable for that: good writing.
Here is a classic example of a voiceless journeyman director who will only be as good as his material. He might make all his days production-wise and always come in under budget but in ten years no one will remember his work exists.
And 2007 will be remembered as the year of the Coens.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:59 am
I am so envious I can barely even write. There Will Be Blood is the movie I’m most looking forward to this year. I’m hoping to find a sneak preview or something but otherwise I’ll have a blue Christmas until it opens.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
I’m still surprised no one her has really brought up ‘Once’ as the best movie of the year. As far as love stories go, I believe ‘Once’ has enough originality and honesty to make it the years #1 film. Not to mention, the soundtrack is omg excellent.
One more thing, its hard to contend a movie as ‘Best of the year’ when it’s released on 12/26. I say this because people/critics/bloggers have already started putting out their top10-20-50-200 lists and we’ve still got one whole month left in 2007.
And I think 2007 will be remembered as the year of Seth Rogen & Judd Apatow.
My top3 thus far:
1. Once
2. Juno
3. Eastern Promises
*always subject to change
November 29th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
@Freddie,
Hey man, you’re not alone. At least, amongst audiences in college and film school, “Juno” is definitely getting a lot of rolled eyes. I liked “TYFS” for its originality and mix of socio-politico comedy and believe that Reitman is a comedic voice that will deliver more goods in the future.
However, “Juno” feels very calculated - from its posters to its dialogue- to exemplify and hiply package INDIE QUIRK for a mainstream audience. It’s like Reitman saw “Little Miss Sunshine” and decided that he could make a better one. This is a film that looks and sounds like its sponsored by Urban Outfitters and Peter, you have to acknowledge that this sentiment is out there amongst 18-20somethings because it is. That “homeskillet” line is the type of “white guy talk like rapper hee hee” line that wasn’t exactly cool 10 years ago. And sure, Rotten Tomatoes is rating it high, but most of those reviewers are 40 years old and a little out of touch.
“Juno” will face the same long-term argument with younger audiences that “The Royal Tennebaums” did and, unfortunately, Wes Anderson might never live down. We may have never seen these characters in “Juno” before, but for a lot of us, they existed as cookie-cutter quirk patterns in our mind long before Reitman started filming and Diablo started writing. It’s this year’s “Little Miss Preggos (hah preggos!)” and for many of us, barf.
Meanwhile, “There Will Be Blood” will hopefully get both the nom and the O for Best Pic. This is a director trying a different genre and character study from anything he’s done before, and ripples with current social, anecdotal and worldly undercurrents that need to be addressed right now (and not in “war films”). This is a film that is haunting, beautiful and exemplifies film as a beloved craft of much tradition. DDL is on fire, infusing his character with greed, hate and ambition until he transcends into a restless force that defined America in the 20th and 21st Centuries. If “Juno” wins, we will surely look back at that Awards ceremon(e)y and wonder what the fuck happened, as if often the case. PTA has topped “Boogie Nights” with an entirely different masterwork and that is no small feat. I haven’t been this excited by a movie since “Kill Bill.” “TWBB” is epic, up there with the Kubrick epics. It’s been a long time since we could say that.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
I’m in agreement with your feelings on Juno, Peter. I went to a screening this week and absolutely fell in love with the movie. I adored the characters, who were nicely written and well acted. Jason Bateman back in the day use to the annoy the living crap out of me, but since Aressted Development I have come to really enjoy him. Everything about this movie entertained me, including the soundtrack.
I will say that Juno’s parent’s reaction while entertaining is pretty mild. However, there is one line the dad says to Juno, which expresses the disappointment he feels, it’s rather perfect as is her response.
I can’t wait to see this movie again because sometimes it was hard to hear the dialogue because the audience was laughing so much.
I’ve already begun to recommend this movie to friends, family and co-workers.
I can’t wait to see There Will Be Blood - I adore Daniel Day Lewis you know you’re getting something good when he’s in a film.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
This is a wonderful movie! Cody, Page and Reitman… these people are the genuine article in a cynical time. They created such a funny, smart and thoughtful film.
They deserve the praise and publicity they’re getting.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Could be tin-foil hat time, but I’m starting to wonder if someone isn’t getting paid to promote Juno. LOL!
November 29th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Robert: I Wish I was being paid to help promote Juno, seriously. God knows, we’ve had a lot of not so great movies advertise on /Film in the past. I would love to get paid to promote something as great as this film.
As for doubting the quality of this film: Don’t listen to the haters in the above comments, do a google search, read the opinions of other critics. Do an imdb search, look at the user rating. And more importantly, see this movie when it comes out, and shoot me an email if you disagree. I’m betting you won’t.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Comparing There Will Be Blood to Juno is like comparing an 18th century castle to a house of cards.
One will endure the test of time - the other will be blown over and forgotten in no time.
You’ve seriously insulted There Will Be Blood with this comparison.
November 30th, 2007 at 2:00 am
wow, thanks for the reviews… i’ll check both movies with great expectations and will get my veredict :-)
November 30th, 2007 at 9:46 am
I was just teasing. I think it is just an apples and oranges thing really. I just tend to prefer darker, heavier stuff…even in my comedy (looking forward to No Country for Old Men this weekend). I can’t help it, but those trailer(s) for Juno just make my blood boil and my skin crawl. I really don’t think I could sit through it without gouging out my eyes. That’s just my opinion. But it is your site, so by all means write about what you dig. I’ll still come around.
I do wish Michael Cera would try to throw off the Arrested Development (one of my all time favorite shows) persona very soon and try something different.
November 30th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Michael Cera can’t drop the “Arrested Development” act because that’s really him, That show was great though.
IMO… just from PTA’s script i believe “There Will Be Blood” will be amazing, even Oscar worthy.
December 12th, 2007 at 9:30 am
Forget the% rating at rotten tomatoes…It is silly
Look at the score out of 10…
Juno 7.8
There will be blood 8.2
No Country for old men 8.6
By the way 8.6 is best of this decade tied with Pan’s Labrynth
It is early days for Juno and There will be blood which I have not seen yet but do not kid yourself. The favorite for this year is No Country For Old Men and it is already racking up critics awards like NYFC and NBR.
I sure am looking forward to Juno and Blood. They both look good.
December 12th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
Well after seeing Juno on Sunday and TWBB at the Museum of the Moving Image screening last night (with PTA, DD Lewis, and Kevin O’Connor in attendance) I can easily say, without a doubt, that TWBB BLEW Juno out of the water. It was such a better film. Juno was funny, quirky, and smart, but Blood was the sh*t; everything was perfect with it. Blood was def better than No Country as well (in my eyes). Right now Blood and Jesse James are my 2 favorites of the year and it’s going to be a tough pick for me.
Also, the soundtrack to Blood is also far superior than Juno (at least the music that made it into both films).
December 31st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
I liked Juno, but the hiptalk was waaaaaaaaaaay too much for me. And there was no reason for it; it wasn’t necessary. It could have been great, instead of just good, if they had had the good sense to cut about 40% of the stupid dialogue. The girl talked as if she were a 40 year old expert on pop culture. It was as if the writer opened an old Life Magazine and simply stole random pop culture references and put them into the mouths of the characters.
For the Juno character it worked somewhat, but was still overboard. To have other characters talking that way was just silly.
It will be interesting to see if the writer tries to pull this gimmick in the future, because it’s a style that is sure to wear thin as soon as people catch on to what she’s doing.
January 1st, 2008 at 7:42 am
I am mystified by the proclamations of greatness for “There Will Be Blood.” No film has disappointed me as much in ages. When a film runs long, it is expected to provide quality. “Blood” is merely tedious. I almost laughed out loud at the “I drank your milkshake” part. The overacting by DD-L is ludicrous and unappealing. I half suspect that the attacks on oilmen (I have no problem with Luddite views if they are justified) and religion (if merited, fine) are the source of much of the raving on behalf of the film. But the silliness of “Blood” cannot be overlooked by intelligent viewers. If it is post 1929, why does Eli still seem to be 14? Why does the Sunday family not discuss Paul’s absence? Why would a shrewd man like Plainview wait so long to test Henry? What happens to his sidekick (the former Julius Caesar of “Rome”) whose skills alas are seemingly shunted to the cutting room? Why does HW speak like a person always deaf rather than like a person born hearing? Perhaps an actor who could sign was needed and the adult HW is portrayed by an actor actually deaf?
“No Country For Old Men” is so superior in its rendition of a nihilistic view of America that the two films ought not even be mentioned in the same breath.
As for “Juno”, the script and the performance by the young star are truly outstanding. The positive charm of the film is delightful. It is unfair to compare this fine film to last year’s most overrated picture, “Little Miss Sunshine”, a work I found devoid of any merit.
January 19th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
I haven’t seen Juno yet, so I can’t really weigh in on the Juno vs. There Will Be Blood debate. I have however seen Blood and I just want to comment on the previous post re: adult HW and deafness.
The adult HW is played by Russell Harvard an actor who is indeed deaf. Interestingly, he prepared for his role by working with renowned deaf actor and drama teacher Patrick Graybill to translate his lines into the kind of sign language used in the early 1900s (according to Galludet’s website: http://news.gallaudet.edu/?ID=12453). That’s why his signing may have looked a little strange to those of us who know ASL.
Also, I strongly disagree with the previous poster’s criticism that HW speaks like a person born deaf rather than born hearing. I am a hearing person with deaf people in the family, some of whom were born completely deaf, and some of whom lost their hearing during childhood after hearing and speaking English. Based on my communication with my deaf relatives, I would say that Harvard’s vocalization is even better than most people who lost their hearing in childhood after speaking and hearing English. Just think- if you couldn’t hear yourself, you wouldn’t know what you sounded like. You would be relying on muscle memory to produce sounds you could no longer hear. In the 15 years since HW lost his hearing, it is perfectly logical to assume that his ability to produce crystal-clear, perfect “hearing-world” speech would have diminished.
I loved this film for many reasons and applaud Blood for using Deaf actors to play deaf parts. Bravo!