9 Characters of the '00s Who Changed Movies Forever
While the '00s -- or the Aughts, or whatever you want to call the decade almost past -- end at midnight Thursday, they leave a spectrum of legacies for us to consider heading into the '10s. Not a lot of them were very good for movies, unfortunately, but filmgoers can still find some pretty significant influences in all the debris and disappointments. And love them or hate them, some of the most important influences came in convenient character form. Read on for an assortment of the essentials, and of course add your own after browsing.
[In order of appearance]
· Leticia Musgrove (Monster's Ball, 2001)
Prior to Halle Berry's death-row widow -- who seduced her husband's executioner between whipping her obese son's hide -- it wasn't quite so fashionable for mainstream glamour actresses to go in search of uglified indie roles that might help validate them through awards-season attention. After Letitia changed Berry's life (however briefly), a similar tack worked for Nicole Kidman (The Hours), Charlize Theron (Monster), Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose) and Kate Winslet (The Reader). And those were just Oscar winners; Naomi Watts (21 Grams), Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married) and who knows how many others carried their films to prominence on the strength of performance and Oscar-worthy self-degradation.
· Jar Jar Binks (Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, 2002)
Yes, fans, I know the mincing, much-hated Gungan prat was introduced and received the majority of his franchise screen time in 1999's The Phantom Menace. Which is exactly the point: Prior to 2002, despite George Lucas's reedting, souping up and indiscriminately plundering the Star Wars universe to within an inch of its life, fans had to mount a global repudiation of Jar Jar Binks before the aloof filmmaker ever took their considerations to heart. Clones's reduction of Jar Jar to a minor role -- plus its reinstatement of C3PO as comic relief -- proved that even if Lucas wasn't always listening, he could be gotten to.
· Joel Barish (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, 2004)
It was some kind of miracle that Michel Gondry and Charlie Kaufman got to make another movie after their maligned 2001 collaboration Human Nature. But there it was: Eternal Sunshine, their classic experiment in love, memory, medicine and narrative that has endured to become many critics' favorite film of the decade. As its principals shared a screenplay Oscar, the film's semi-autobiographical lead character made the '00s safe for both Gondry (who'd revisit similar themes on his own, and not quite as successfully, in The Science of Sleep) and Kaufman, whose Synechdoche, New York emerged as one of the most confounding and underrated films of this or any decade. Moreover, Barish's downbeat romantic represented the last (the only?) memorable character Jim Carrey would play in the '00s -- and maybe even a career peak.
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
Let's call it the naughts, and move on.
I'd have to think the undeniable durability of Harry Potter bears mentioning, and, I don't know what he represented in movie making history, but I'll nominate Wall-E for some sort of mention.
It's called The Noughties in the UK, a much better and fitting name
"I also don’t know what more to say about Zoe Saldana as the Na’vi princess...except that her motion-capture dazzler is the first performance of its kind..."
I'm guessing you've never seen The Lord of the Rings.
"...it wasn’t until Sex and the City’s heroine made it to the multiplex that her potential was fully realized..."
Ummm, studios had been clamoring for a movie version even before the show ended. So they already knew her full potential.
I nominate Kirk Lazarus played by Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder. He reminded the mainstream that acting isn't just playing a version of yourself or throwing on a casual accent; acting can be a full TRANSFORMATION (with-out feeling like Community Theater, which is what happens when lesser actors try and prove their "range").
He also proved that sometimes comedic roles are worthy of Oscar nominations...
I respect you reading and commenting, Salty, but could you please not treat me like an idiot? I think we can have a civil disagreement about LOTR in particular, which did (impressively) feature motion-capture of Andy Serkis's body and head as Gollum, but still required secondary CGI for his facial characteristics. I'm sure there was some of that required for Avatar as well, but the in-camera animation itself is the technology that has not been used before; it didn't exist 10 years ago.
He was on the short list. Let's call him 9.5. Blame Jar Jar!
Sorry, I didn't mean to treat you like an idiot, but saying her performance is the first of its kind is false, plain and simple. Just because the technology has improved to capture it differently doesn't make it the first.
That's like saying King Kong is the first film of it's kind to use stop motion and animatronics when it had been used previously. They only slightly improved on it for Kong.
I blame Jar Jar for EVERYTHING wrong with ANYTHING.
Saltysue:
When the word "realized" is used in the context above, it doesn't refer to a realization as an "epiphany" or a "eureka", but rather as s"omething being fully manifested."
Next time you go around trying to be smarter than someone, remember that it helps to be actually smart. Good luck with your GED.
Wow that remark wasn't as snarky, insightful, or clever as you think. Better luck next time.
That comment wasn't as snarky, insightful or clever as you think. Better luck next time. In fact next time it may be better to focus on commenting on the article rather than a commenters vocabulary.
Why is everyone so surprised Sue was being Salty? That is like being surprised Old No. 7 made a Katherine Heigl joke...
I have thought about it and, yeah, Gollum should have been on the list. Even Cameron says he knew it was time to make Avatar after seeing Gollum...
Gollum proved motion capture was for more than just running and jumping. That it could be an ACTUAL performance, and even though Stu is right about his face not being motion captured the animators based the facial performance directly from the footage of Andy Serkis. Another thing which makes Gollum unique is the fact his motion capture was done on outdoor sets while interacting with the live action actors.
This list is super lame.Only few of this characters really deserves to be on it.And what about Jack Sparrow!Accept once and for all that Johnny Depp's pirate is one of the best characters and he WILL be remembered after 30 years and at least 7 of characters in your list won't.
I'd have to agree with SaltySue on this one. Citing Avatar as 'first of its kind' technology without citing Gollum isn't very fair. You didn't cite the in-camera animation technology in your article either, you in fact utilized the words 'motion capture.' That terminology covers 'all manner of sins' so to speak. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, however. I think in the end we all got what you were speaking of.
That being said, I don't think SaltySue's remark could be considered 'uncivil.' That's a little harsh. And...sorry...it's a little pet-peeve of mine...but I hate when people infer far more into a statement than is actually stated. 'Guessing' that your elevation of Avatar's special effects might be due to your not seeing any of the Lord of the Rings movies is far from infering that you are an idiot. Maybe its a regional thing, but where I come from her statement is just 'polite sarcasm' that a person may have missed something. Even profound thinkers can miss something.
They forgot to mention McLovin.
MCLOVIN!!!
I have to agree. Johnny Depp's Jack Sparrow proved to be the male version of Halle Berry's Leticia Musgrove. It encouraged actors to stop playing it safe and take it to the next level. Without Jack Sparrow, would we have Heath Ledger's Joker or Robert Downey Jr.'s Kirk Lazarus? Or even the most out of character performance ever.... Tom Crusie's Les Grossman.
I'm glad that S.T. VANAIRSDALE mentioned so many female characters. nice calls!
Seriously? Sex and the City somehow empowers women? The main cast runs the gamut of female stereotypes and all four characters combined MIGHT have enough going on inside to make for a single person with depth...note I said might!
I think its uproariously funny that this show has been latched onto by the feminist crowd...since it should instead be a perfect example of everything they hate...just shows not even they have any idea what they're mad at...except maybe their own vaginas.
And Heath Ledger as a gay cowboy? Really...thats one of the most important characters of the decade? Was that even a stretch for him as an actor? Not likely...
Jar Jar is Jar Jar...probably the most interesting character on this list...and you put him on it for sucking? Great stuff...
How can a list composed of mostly characters from movies hardly anyone has seen possibly be shown as an example of "the most influential characters of the decade"? Ridiculous...although since no doubt every critic and pretentious "movie lover" has seen them, we can assume they will all be influential to the future of "Oscar bait" films, but the movie going public at large will remain thankfully ignorant of the kind of pointless ego driven films that populate most of this list.
I have to say I don't find any of these characters memorable. This was one poor list.
Exactly.
Well, I glad someone understood where I was coming from.
The ubiquitous praise for Avatar shows how deeply people are willing to worship Cameron. Everyone seems to be lifting this man upon their shoulders and celebrating him for doing "what's never been done before", which not only isn't the truth for 'Avatar', but also wasn't the truth for 'Terminator 2'.
Cameron wasn't the first to use CGI in a motion picture, he was just the first to showcase the viability in a blockbuster (preceded by 'Young Sherlock Holmes' and his own 'The Abyss'. Likewise, he wasn't the first to use 3D photography and motion capture, he was just among the first to successfully put them together (preceded by 'The Lord of the Rings', 'King Kong', and the many Zemeckis films beginning with 'The Polar Express').
If anything, it shows how shallow the film industry has become. There was an age when audiences were impressed by acting depth and range, unorthodox stories, clever and eloquent writing. Now we're simply turned on by pretty pixels.
This isn't much of a list. You say this is a list of characters that changed movies forever, yet you include "Speed Racer" the film? You include Sex and the City's Carrie and Effie White from Dreamgirls, yet it seems to be more about the cultural impact that the actor had, not the character. Your inclusion of Daniel Plainview seems to be in praise more of the director and the actor and the quality of the film, than the character.
Characters who changed movies forever in the 00s: The Joker (obviously), Rocky Balboa (haven't seen this one, but it showed the staying power of a familiar character, no matter how old. And afterward, we got to see McClaine, Rambo, Indiana Jones, etc return), McLovin, Gollum (who should be in place of Zoe Saldana's na'vi), Wolverine, Tony Stark (misanthropic, alcoholic hero), Jack Sparrow, Edward Cullen (Like it or not) just to name a few.
Why is Neytiri on here but not Gollum? Gollum was groundbreaking in this regard, and there were fans and critics alike screaming for an Oscar nomination for that performance.
Next »