The lost decade – in film

From terrorism to wars, from economic collapse to natural disasters, the Aughties were a terrible decade. Thank god they’re over.

Another reason to forget this past decade is the movies that won the Academy Award for best picture.

In many ways, the winning films mirror the Aughties: violent, harsh, a little schizophrenic and, ultimately, meaningless. It got so bad that Hollywood had to nominate 10 films this year for the first time since 1943. That means there will be nine films instead of four that I probably haven’t seen. Actually, I did a little better this year. I saw two of the nominess.

Here’s the list of the Aughties’ “winners”:

2000: “Gladiator” – A video game movie. Long on ultra-violence and gore and short on substance and meaning.

2001: “A Beautiful Mind” – Almost as unstable as its subject. What appeared to be a clever ruse to experience the madness of Nobel Prize-winning mathematician John Nash, turned out to be confusing and disingenuous. Is there a reality in the film that can be trusted? No. And that’s a little dishonest.

2002: “Chicago” – A fun musical that has the audience rooting for conniving vixens. It represents the decade well since the bad “guys” win.

2003: “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” – The final chapter of the Tolkien trilogy that proved to be one long, mega-violent video game. Well made, but too much dizzying camera work. Has anyone figured out what it all meant? I sure haven't.

2004: “Million Dollar Baby”: A brutal, bloody boxing film of a female pugilist who ends up paralyzed from the neck down and begs to put out of her misery. That’s entertainment?

2005: “Crash” – The decade’s best film about our widening racial divides. Tackles the tough issues of our time and still manages to be hopeful. A rare triumph.

2006: “The Departed” – Boilerplate work from Martin Scorsese. Mean and violent. No one to root for. It won because the Academy felt that a Scorsese film was due. Not for this one, though. “Babel,” another nominated film, was the definitive post-9/11 film of the decade. Haunting, sobering and sad.

2007: “No Country For Old Men” – A disturbingly violent film from the Coen brothers who won because, again, the Academy thought they were due. Josh Brolin was excellent as was Oscar-winner Javier Bardem, who played a Grim Reaper, bringing death to most he meets. The character of the decade.

2008: “Slumdog Millionaire” – Cruel, gripping, unsettling look at modern India, which is not likely to use this flick to promote tourism. It’s a cross between the TV game show “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” and the holocaust film, “Schindler’s List.” In that way, it was emblematic of the decade. In spite of great acting and filmmaking, it’s hard to recommend.

2009: The nominees are: “Avatar,” “The Hurt Locker,” “The Blind Side,” “District 9,” “An Education,” “Inglorious Basterds,” “Precious,” “A Serious Man,” “Up,” and “Up in the Air.”

I’ve seen two of the nominees, “Avatar” and “Up in the Air.”

“Avatar,” the 3-D sci-fi epic, is now the highest-grossing film of all time. The premise, the exploitation of indigenous people and the devastation of their land by an imperialistic country, which happens to be the U.S., is timeless and instructive. The special effects are astonishing. Still, it seemed like a bit of “Transformers” or “District 9” crashed the party and the film, at times, was no more than a noisy, violent video game. In that way, “Avatar” should win best picture as a bookend to “Gladiator.” Movies, now, must mirror “reality” presented by Xbox and Playstation. And, the only video game I understand is “Solitaire” on my computer.

The other nominee, “Up in the Air,” certainly captures the spirit of the times since it is about a man who goes around firing people from companies who are too spineless to do it themselves. George Clooney is great, but I never felt truly moved by this film as I should have been. Part of the reason is that no character is truly empathetic, except the ones who are fired. Too bad one of them was not a lead character.

So, what does this past decade mean for the next one in cinema? Well, we can expect more loud, violent movies that look like video games on the big screen. Perhaps, instead of 3-D glasses, moviegoers will get joysticks or video game consoles to interact with the films. Will this help cure our national epidemic of obesity?