Top 10 Movie Villains

I've been thinking about movie villains recently, especially after watching Star Trek and really noticing its lack of a truly memorable villain. Without further adieu, I present my choice of the top 10 movie villains of all time. What do you think of my selections?

10. HAL 9000, 2001: A Space Odyssey
HAL is scary. A sentient on-board computer designed to help navigate the spaceship Discovery, HAL shows what could happen if mankind relies too much on technology and artificial intelligence, which has become even more relevant as the information age progresses. The computer wants to ensure mission success at any cost, even if it means killing the crew members on board when they threaten his disconnection...

9. Noah Cross, Chinatown
One of the most purely villainous characters in the history of cinema. Noah has no redeeming qualities and when the movie reveals how despicable his actions truly are, it comes as a great shock and with great revulsion to the viewer. He may seem like a kindly old man from this picture, but he is anything but. I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't seen the movie, but the last 20 minutes of this film really showcase how horrible human nature can be.

8. Eve Harrington, All About Eve
Eve is just so conniving and devious, all with an exterior of being this warm and good-hearted fan of her idol, Margo Channing. She is the epitome of the scheming youth seeking to supplant the older hero. What makes Eve memorable as a villain his how she starts out as a seemingly innocent fan; definitely a case of a pleasant exterior hiding something truly despicable on the inside. Everything comes full circle in the end though...

7. Phyllis Dietrichson, Double Indemnity
Dietrichson has come to fully embody the femme fatale character. Unhappy in her marriage, she seduces the seemingly innocent insurance salesman Walter Neff to murder her husband so they can be together. Of course, Phyllis' black widow character is using him. This motif has been mimicked in countless works, but the original is still the best, and creepiest.

6. Anton Chigurh, No Country for Old Men
What a chilling character. Chigurh is one of those memorable villains that scare the living bajeezus out of you whenever they are on-screen. From his coin-flipping to decide life and death, mop-top haircut, eerie bolt pistol, and distinctive voice, Chigurh is truly an unstoppable evil.

5. Nurse Ratched, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Nurse Ratched antagonizes her charges in the insane asylum as an iron-fisted dictator. She even drives one inmate to suicide through her cajoling and authoritarian rule. Ratched epitomizes what happens when power and authority go terribly wrong.

4. Hannibal Lecter, The Silence of the Lambs
Ah, Hannibal the cannibal. Such a creepy villain and a truly memorable performance. His cold intellect and remorselessness make him truly feared, although he does have a soft spot for Clarisse. Perhaps that makes him even more chilling, since the viewer realizes he has the capacity for human empathy but chooses to disregard it most of the time. Failed as a believable villain in his stand-alone effort, however. Still, what he did to those prison guards in Silence terrified me and countless others. I made a mistake when I first watched this for the home alone in my basement with the lights out...

3. The Joker, The Dark Knight
A maniacal clown bent on mayhem and destruction, portrayed flawlessly. What makes the Joker such a villainous and frightful character is his unpredictability. There is no method to his madness. Some villains can be understood and thus lose some of their ability to generate fear. The Joker has a depth that makes him impossible to comprehend, which adds to his evil mystique.

2. Norman Bates, Psycho
While Norman is an insane, knife-wielding "psycho," as exemplified by the infamous shower scene, his creepiest qualities are only revealed in hindsight at the end of the film. After discussing the role his mother plays in his life, when the astonishing reveal occurs it is like a fog lifts from the viewer's eyes, and the fog is replaced by horror. Hitchcock had a knack for creating great villains, and Bates is his finest. After seeing this for the first time, I didn't shower without some anxiety for weeks.

1. Darth Vader, The Empire Strikes Back
So we come at last to the number one villain of all-time: Darth Vader. You'll notice I put his movie credit as The Empire Strikes Back, with good reason. In Star Wars, we get a glimpse of Vader's evil. His intimidating presence, striking black helmet and outfit, that iconic voice, and his merciless slaying of his old mentor easily strike fear into the viewer. However, in Empire, his villainy is revealed fully when he announces he is Luke's father. Also, who can forget him force-choking Imperial fleet officers right and left. When Vader loses his cool during his duel with Luke on Cloud City, he is truly terrifying, especially when we realize he is committing these acts against his own son. While he partially regains his humanity in the third film, he will forever be remembered as the greatest film villain of all-time.

And there you have it. I hope you enjoy. If you think someone doesn't belong or I didn't include a villain who does, feel free to discuss below!

In Honor of the Preakness: Top 3 Horse Racing Movies

Since today is the 134th running of the Preakness Stakes, I thought it would be appropriate to share my top 3 horse racing movies of all time. Honestly, there have not been a slew of great movies on the subject. I'm not really sure why, possibly because horse racing is not as popular among the general public as some sports. Also, the stories must primarily focus on the human elements (jockeys, trainers, owners, fans) rather than the horses themselves. Without further ado, here are my top 3 best horse racing movies of all time.

3. National Velvet (1944)
An uplifting tale about Velvet Brown, a twelve-year old girl who saves a horse, dubbed "The Pie," from being slaughtered. Velvet, portrayed by Elizabeth Taylor in the role that launched her to stardom, trains The Pie for the Grand National steeplechase. Along the way, she's helped by Mi Taylor (Mickey Rooney). When the day of the big race comes around, The Pie's regular jockey expresses doubts of victory, so Velvet disguises herself as a male and runs her stallion to victory. Adapted from the novel of the same name, National Velvet is a great family movie that still delights fans over 60 years after its release.

2. Seabiscuit (2003)
This star-studded film brought horse-racing movies back into the national spotlight, although no others have replicated its success since. Nominated for seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture (winning none), Seabiscuit was modified for the big screen from Laura Hillenbrand's book, Seabiscuit: An American Legend. Placing the camera amidst the horses, the viewer feels like they are riding with the jockeys and horses as Seabiscuit and company gallop around the track. Another feel-good story. I smell a pattern among this genre of film.

1. The Black Stallion (1979)
The quintessential horse movie, the actual race is not as integral as the relationship that develops between Alec Ramsay and the Black, the horse he befriends after a shipwreck strands him on a desert isle. Alec returns to New York where Henry Dailey (Mickey Rooney again) helps him train the stallion to race. In the match race at the end of the film, Alec and the Black defeat the two heavyweights, Sun Raider and Cyclone, although everyone though their entry in the race was a publicity stunt. This movie, another feel-good tale, was also adapted from the popular novel that showcases the bond that develops between horse and rider. Roger Ebert called The Black Stallion the best movie of 1980, which is high praise since that puts it ahead of such classics as Empire Strikes Back and Raging Bull. Ebert may want to change his pick based on posterity, but he definitely singled out the greatest horse flick of all time.

Personally, I enjoy movies about horses and thoroughbred racing. I hope we see another great one in the coming years.

Star Trek - Things to Avoid the Next Time Around

Over at Chud.com, Devin Faraci has posted his top 5 things that Star Trek should avoid in the next movie installment. He cites the following:

5. Don't bring in Kahn
4. Leave the Bumpy Ewok out of it (Scotty's alien friend)
3. Don't tie the next movie into Lost
2. Don't start on Earth
1. Leave the original canon alone

Devin has the right idea with numbers 5 and 1. The original canon should be left alone, at least for this second movie. I think once the series establishes itself on its own merits, then there is room to bring in some of the characters and plots from the original series or movies. I would prefer a truly original mission for Star Trek 2 version 2.0 though. Kahn should definitely not appear.

In response, I have created my Top 5 things for Star Trek to avoid in the next film. Enjoy!

5. Don't mess with the original canon; as mentioned above

4. Ditch the Spock/Uhura romance. It just didn't work well in the recent movie. I think it's welcoming to have Spock exhibiting more emotions in this reboot. It adds nuance to his character and Zachary Quinto can pull it off. But his fling with Uhura felt tacked on for no real effect. Also, it made me question Spock's morals and judgment, since I gathered that Uhura was one of his students at the time. Maybe this romance will be nipped in the bud.

3. Avoid 1-dimensional villains. The best films, when pitting good versus evil, have truly believable and well-conceived antagonists. In Star Trek, Eric Bana's Nero lacked true motivation. I never bought his reasoning behind wanting to kill Spock and take revenge on the Federation. This could be improved in subsequent films. I mean, look at Star Trek II. That movie succeeds on so many levels because Kahn is a formidable and compelling villain.

2. Generic explosions around the halls of the Enterprise. How many times have we seen this? An explosion occurs in one part of the ship, sending people and sparks everywhere but the viewer is really not sure what is happening. Star Trek is not the only franchise guilty of this act; Star Wars is another prime example (like in the strafing run on the Death Star). I propose that a more detailed and realistic attempt should be made based on what would happen if a missile or laser strikes a ship in space. And another thing, do those shields actually DO anything? From watching the space battles, seemingly not.

1. Do not COMPLETELY reject the original canon. Ok, so maybe this doesn't quite mesh with what I said in #5. But what I mean here is simple. While J.J. Abrams' new franchise is a reboot, the original series and movies did in fact happen. People know these characters and they remember how acted and interacted amongst each other. While the new characters should be fleshed out and re-envisioned by their new actors, many of their personality traits should remain intact. I think the recent film did very well in this respect, with some characters hearkening back to their originals more than others (see Karl Urban's portrayal of Dr. McCoy) and others being more refreshing and new (e.g. Mr. Scott as played by Simon Pegg). Keep the integrity of the characters while re-envisioning them. A hard, but worthy task.

What do you think the next installment in the Star Trek series should avoid or add?

Who Will Watch the Watchmen?

This is the question that is on my mind today. I for one am very excited about the film adaptation of Alan Moore's epic masterpiece. However, the average moviegoer has never heard of the source material, which could be a problem come opening day. While most critics and journalists have labeled Watchmen a "comic book movie," I find it difficult (although I of course haven't seen it yet) to lump it in with the various superhero movies that have come out over the last 10 years or so, starting with X-Men and Spider-Man. In reality, Watchmen the graphic novel became a complete reversal from standard comic books, shedding many of the stereotypical motifs and themes that ran rampant throughout the industry before its publication in 1986 (along with Frank Miller's equally groundbreaking The Dark Knight Returns). Since that is the case, I wonder if people who enjoy the standard and normally simple-minded "comic book movie" will enjoy something with more of an adult-oriented narrative, focusing on character development over action. At least, that is what the movie SHOULD have, if director Zack Snyder is faithful to the graphic novel.

I'm interested to see how the movie does, both critically and commercially. So far, early reviews have been mixed, citing a few awkward line readings from Malin Akerman (Silk Spectre) and Matthew Goode (Ozymandias). Also, critics seem torn concerning the level of violence, which is supposedly quite high, and also that Snyder does not quite live up to the narrative mastery of Moore's original work. Commercially, its length, relative unknown status among non-hardcore fans, and R rating seems to suggest that it will be a modest success at best. Still, it has benefited from an amazing marketing campaign and there is a lot of hype surrounding the movie's release. Hopefully it can live up to it.

Personally, I think I'm going to love it. I already know that there will be differences from the graphic novel and I accept them. I only read the book last year and am therefore not as attached to it as, say, Lord of the Rings, something I grew up loving and cherishing. In the case of LotR, I enjoyed the movies, but continuously found flaws related to things that Peter Jackson either omitted, changed, or added (the elves coming to the rescue at Helm's Deep in The Two Towers comes to mind). I am a little more willing to give Snyder some license in what he changes from Watchmen, even though I think he will be pretty true to the work.

I can't wait to check it out and will immediately report my thoughts once I see it sometime this weekend!

The Oscars are Fast Approaching...

Oh, Oscar season. Always an exciting time for movie fans, as well as the fashion aficionados that love to watch the celebrities strut their stuff down the red carpet. I can't remember the last Oscar telecast that I missed, but this year is definitely the first one in awhile that I'm not eagerly anticipating.

Don't get me wrong, there are a few compelling reasons to tune in to the 81st Oscars this Sunday night. For one thing, Hugh Jackman will be the host and that is cause for celebration. Jackman is sure to bring his Aussie wit and charm to the production and is sure not to disappoint the Hollywood insiders the way recent host Jon Stewart apparently has. Personally, I enjoyed Stewart's hosting, although at times he got a little too political. But it's Jon Stewart, and you expect that. His humor was refreshing after Chris Rock and Ellen Degeneres' less than stellar performances. While I haven't caught any of the Tony's that Hugh has hosted three times in the past few years, he has received stellar reviews. I expect good things on this front.

In more sobering news, the main reason I will tune into the Oscars this year is to hopefully see the late, great Heath Ledger win a much-deserved Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his role as the Joker in last summer's blockbuster, The Dark Knight. Ledger completely owned this role and in so doing, dominated the best film of 2008. I never really thought anyone could surpass Jack Nicholson's turn as the Joker in the original 1989 Tim Burton flick, but Heath rose to the occasion by bringing his all. As a passing fan of the Batman comics, he really brought a lot of the nuance and inner conflict that the Joker on the page possesses. This is the greatest portrayal of Batman's greatest villain, even better than Mark Hamill's amazing Joker from the '90s Batman Animated Series. The sad fact that Ledger has been taken away from us so young, when he had so much potential for other memorable roles, makes the Oscars a special night. Hopefully, the Academy will honor Heath with only the second posthumous Oscar in Academy history, after Peter Finch for his role in Network.

The rest of the Oscar movies and storylines are not nearly as compelling. Maybe this has to do with the fact that I have not watched any of the Best Picture nominees with the exception of Benjamin Button. I know, I know, this really discredits me as a movie blogger. However, the only one of those movies I really want to see is Slumdog Millionaire and I just haven't had the time to go to the theater lately. I think the Academy is out of touch with its audience, which shows since they did not include The Dark Knight among the nominees and instead stuck the Holocaust film The Reader in there. Of course, I'm not suggesting the Academy should "sell out" by elevating a non-deserving movie to Best Picture status, but The Dark Knight definitely belongs there. Maybe its stigma as a "comic-book movie" lost it points in Academy voters' eyes. However, I consider on par with Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King;; a genre movie that overcomes its genre's (relatively) low status in the view of serious movie fans. Well, here's hoping for a Slumdog win, and I'll catch all the movies when I have the time and can accurately report on which is the most deserving Best Picture nominee.

Still, even without seeing much of the movies, I'm going to offer some Oscar predictions. They are as follows:

Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire
Best Actor in a Leading Role: Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler
Best Actress in a Leading Role: Melissa Leo, Frozen River
Best Director: Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight
Best Actress in a Supporting Role: Viola Davis, Doubt
Animated Feature Film: Wall-E (Another movie which could have snagged a Best Picture spot)
Best Cinematography: The Dark Knight
Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay): Simon Beaufoy, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Writing (Original Screenplay): Martin McDonagh, In Bruges (Maybe I'm biased because I loved this one so much)
Best Foreign Language Film: Waltz with Bashir,

And there you have it; my Oscar predictions. I'm not going to go into the "lesser" categories due to time and not really knowing enough about the nominated films. We'll see how my list stacks up to the winners on Sunday, February 22. I'm actually a little more excited to watch the Oscars now that I've written this. What do you think about my list? Anything you would change or am I completely off-base? Be sure to tune in Sunday night to find out!