June 19, 2011

Openness

Okay, I decided that I'd post the "personal reflection paper" from my "Psychology of Interpersonal Relationships" class that I took last semester.  I said I'd write down some of my observations from that class in here because most were relevant toward the subjects covered in my blog/online diary - namely, how fucking hard it is to have a satisfying relationship with people.  We were each required to keep a journal in which we documented "interpersonal happenings", or moments that provided us insight into the way we communicate and relate to each other, so that's the source of many of the examples referenced in here.  Hope you at least find this interesting.  I've tried to explain a few of these stories and left some notes in square brackets.  Although the degree of insight isn't exactly tremendous, I sort of like the way it turned out just because of the way it sounds.  It was simultaneously academic and personal, so I was able to maintain my own typical style of writing (which you are probably familiar with if you've read anything else on this blog).    It was good enough for an A- (which is the grade I'm positive they gave to everybody in the class, although the minus might also refer to the negativity that practically drips off of this paper, as this was written toward the worst part of my depression {which is currently being treated, I'll let you know how it goes if/when I stop being depressed}). 

@@@@@

Although much of the material I’ve discussed in my journals revolves around issues in communicating effectively, I believe that discussing that sort of topic at length is neither productive nor insightful.  This has made the subject of what to discuss for a personal reflection paper a serious challenge.  There isn’t an aspect of my interpersonal relationships that I believe have improved at all over the course of the semester despite learning all that I have about how to make them work.  Much of the blame for this can be placed squarely on my shoulders.  Over the course of the semester I’ve withdrawn from many communications that would have allowed me to really demonstrate what I know about establishing supportive and beneficial relationships.  The truth is that I’m not really in any sort of condition to introspect, since everything I’ve done outside this class involves growing detached from people with whom I already had strong interpersonal relationships and not becoming particularly close with anyone, with the possible exception of [name of friend] in this class.  However, one of the connections I made in a previous collection of articles about openness in interpersonal relationships proves to be a promising avenue for discussion and self-improvement.  Neglecting the details of what I have said about openness in the context of other, more precise areas of study in interpersonal relationships, openness is good.  I see it as the source of fulfillment that one receives from one’s interpersonal relationships, which arguably makes it the key to experiencing a satisfying relationship (in addition to being empirically demonstrated to be the key to personal growth and relationship strengthening).  Thus, it is one of the most important things for a relationship to possess.  However, it cannot exist as part of a pair.  In order for a relationship to truly be “open”, both partners must be willing to present themselves honestly and completely to each other.  This seemingly simple requirement for achieving openness in a relationship is unfortunately very difficult to meet.  It is this difficulty that has motivated me to reflect mainly on the topic of openness in interpersonal relationships.

Openness in a relationship is the degree to which partners are willing to communicate honestly with each other.  It is the comparative lack of pretenses that define everyday communications.  It is, for the most part, directly related to the level of intimacy (emotional or physical) between people.  It is defined by true understanding of oneself and one’s partner.  If it is still difficult to grasp the concept of openness defined on its own terms, it is because it seems to be seen so rarely.  Most relationships are built on some degree of pretense that prevents that relationship from achieving true openness.  The relationship between a loving parent and child, for example, though undeniably intimate, is actually one of the less open relationships* (as I am defining them here) that the child especially is likely to remember in his life.  Most parent-child relationships preclude the possibility (or, at best, willingness) to discuss topics that are often a large part of the child’s life but are considered “inappropriate”, such as sexual activities, drug/alcohol use, etc.  In fact, many children even in healthy, supportive home environments can’t be bothered to share with their parents the most basic parts of their lives, such as, “What did you do today?” or, “What are you learning about in school?”  The parent-child relationship often revolves around the child ensuring that the parent holds him in high regard, which almost always means refraining from sharing with their parent a certain aspect of their lives and ensuring that they are seen as a model child, or at least a child who doesn’t need a parent’s intervention in order to be successful in his life.  Most interpersonal relationships operate on some level of pretense rather than total openness.  Even strong romantic relationships begin with a mutual attempt between partners to impress each other with their strong qualities rather than with their complete self-portraits, character flaws included.

A more complete understanding of the concept of openness can be provided by examining it from a strictly personal standpoint, free of the context of one’s interpersonal relationships.  Openness in a relationship is mostly dependent on both partners being willing to present themselves to others as they are, free of as much pretense as possible.  The willingness to be open is not so much a conscious choice as it is an aspect of one’s personality.  The reason we surround ourselves with pretenses is to mask our insecurities, which are as much a part of our personalities as anything else.  Based on this logic, I would conclude that our willingness to be open with others is generally inversely proportional to our degree of insecurity.

For a while, I considered myself one of the most open people that I know because I do very little to mask the parts of my personality that other people seem to care about.  I quite naturally speak at the speed of thought, speak my thoughts even they don’t really make sense, take (mostly) genuine interest in the lives of others, think in a goal-oriented fashion despite working as a perfectionist, etc.  Of these traits I am fairly proud.  I am willing to share these with other people because it not only allows others to think of me positively, but it allows me to think of myself positively.  It seems that by sharing the parts of a man that reflect positively upon him, he comes to be defined by both himself and his interpersonal relationships in those terms alone.  In this way, refraining from being completely open with others is a somewhat effective way of seeking escape from one’s insecurities.  Therefore, I am not actually as open as I thought I was.  My inability to comfort, my inferiority complex, and my short temper are as much a part of me as the positive qualities I listed above.  Choosing to ignore them at the expense of being able to be truly open with myself and with others is a choice that I may not have made consciously but one that nonetheless hinders my ability to actively participate in an open relationship.

I believe that our generation is far more closed-off and unwilling to be open in our relationships than previous generations for this reason.  There is so much pressure for children to be absolutely perfect in every way these days – academically, socially, etc. – that children’s perceptions of their own shortcomings are exacerbated and develop into a great deal more insecurity than other generations.  If the degree to which one is willing to be open in one’s interpersonal relationships is inversely proportional to one’s degree of insecurity, this increased responsibility toward being the perfect child is likely the cause of this closed-off behavior in which children define themselves far more strongly by pretenses of perfection rather than their true selves. 

Connecting back to openness on the larger scale of entire relationships, I believe that lack of openness is responsible for much of the generally negative interactions I experienced and documented in my journal.  Although I could honestly connect each entry in some way to the concept of openness, I will limit myself to a few examples of the damage that can be caused by the lack of openness in interpersonal relationships. The most obvious example that comes to mind is Entry #12, regarding my experiences with suicide.  [Short version of the story: witnessed the entire immediate aftermath of the kid across the hall from me attempting to kill himself.  He lived, thankfully.] Regarding my unfortunate experience after class, I believe I can somewhat accurately attribute the misery that my fellow resident was obviously experiencing to an extreme lack of openness in his interpersonal relationships.  The reason “nobody saw it coming” was likely because there was no one who would have seen it coming.  The only person who had previously ever known some of the darker aspects of this young man’s personality was himself.  He had done such a great job at concealing a complete, non-ideal version of himself that he had lost the ability to form relationships in which true openness could ever be achieved.  Thus, nobody could know that the real man was actually suffering deeply.  To be in a situation where one fully recognizes his insecurities but cannot do anything to overcome them or share them with others in a truly open relationship is one of the greatest tortures I can imagine.  It is for this reason that I continue to see the short story read in class (described in that same entry) as a trite reflection of the author’s wishful thinking and/or excessive idealism. [Seriously, this was one of the dumbest things ever - we were asked to analyze the story of "Kyle" which was a fucking chain e-mail from the early '00s if I remember right.  This story is some of the biggest bullshit I've ever read in my life.]  There is absolutely no way that one can hide suicidal urges that were very nearly acted upon from others and find a relationship that is open enough to completely change his outlook on life.  The only way this could occur is if he were ignorant enough to completely forget about his insecurities and fully embrace the pretense he had built for himself in one instant as a “cool guy”.

I also feel as if many of the issues involving hostile or ineffective communications are a direct result of the lack of openness with the people with whom I was trying to communicate.  It should be both understandable and expected that my relationships with my group mates in my engineering class are mostly impersonal and detached.  Although I feel as if this might be a bit of a stretch in terms of applying the concept of openness to the communication problems in my engineering group, it may be possible that the general defensiveness in our conversations may be a result of misunderstanding each other’s true selves.  [Short version: one guy didn't know his shit even though he acted like he ran the group and that pissed the rest of us off.]  Presented only with a few brief moments of small talk with my newer group, we were expected to get to work immediately with only a very limited knowledge of each other’s personalities.  The member I described in one of my article responses (note: not in the journal) I now realize was actually relying on his self-confidence to mask his insecurity regarding his understanding of the material we were working with.  This resulted in a notable lack of open communication in our group.  Although the definition of open communication is somewhat different in a technical setting (openness refers more to ensuring that everyone understands what is going, what they should be doing, etc.) it is still the result of these insecurities that a lack of openness is established.  The feigning of confidence results in both the member himself and group perceiving him as someone knowledgeable and useful.  It is only when these insecurities are called to attention (i.e. when asked an especially complex question) that one becomes aware of one’s insecurities.  

Discussing this topic has led me to contemplate some of my relationships that are open rather than defined negatively by their inherent lack of openness.  Unfortunately, there weren’t any real instances of interpersonal openness to document this entire semester.  The closest instance I can think of was when I met my friend (who I hadn’t seen for eight months) for coffee when I was staying at home over spring break.  I honestly do not know why I chose to document visiting my friend’s college instead of this date [unrelated story, but I visited my friend's college and discovered that their dorm was a tight community while at UM there was barely a support system at all], because what followed was one of the most memorable and engaging conversations of my life.  As far as I can remember there was no aspect of our personal or interpersonal lives that wasn’t discussed freely and without pretense, and we both empathically understood of each other’s successes and woes.  It is worth noting that my relationship with this person is some sort of helping relationship – our relationship has always been one of close friendship, but she had previously been both a role model and a teacher to me.  Many of the articles we’ve read about the helping relationship directly address the idea that openness is an absolutely vital characteristic of an effective helping relationship.  The fact that we were fairly open with each other before is likely why I was able to be helped by her in the past, and I also feel that I can attribute some degree of personal growth over the last few years of my life to this as well.  However, the fact that we were not open with each other in the truly fulfilling sense of the word until this night tells me that true openness might be even harder to find than we think.  If my experience with true openness in interpersonal relationships is limited only to brief, one-time experiences, how can I demonstrate that openness can define entire relationships rather than singular encounters with people?  I can’t.  The fact is that true, unabashed, lasting openness is very hard to find between two people.  The closest example I can imagine is the openness between two lovers, but I can’t back up that context with any recent personal experience.

At the beginning of this semester I was of the conviction that these moments of openness in relationships were something of a climax – this is the level of interpersonal connection that cannot be topped and relationships only weaken from this point on.  I have experienced both examples of this belief and counterexamples as well. (I still believe I can safely have an open relationship with the woman in the previous paragraph, although not being in my hometown means I can’t know for sure.)  I no longer believe it to be entirely true.  The reason for this is because I believe I have defined openness too strongly.  Referring exclusively to euphoric moments of intense interpersonal connection absolutely free of pretense would leave everyone under the belief that they were incapable of being in a truly open long-term relationship.  A relationship can still be considered open to a large extent with both participants occupying a certain role (i.e. pretense) such as that of a therapist and a patient.  While this is not what I would consider “true openness” because it is incomplete, there is still huge potential to foster personal growth in the patient, which is what the openness of therapeutic relationships exists to do.  It must still be asserted, however, that the degree of fulfillment that one receives from being involved in an open relationship really depends on the degree to which both partners are willing to be open with each other.  One can be completely open to others – strip their very soul bare to another – and if that is not reciprocated, it can’t be said that there is any openness at all in one’s interpersonal relationships. 

The role of this openness in interpersonal relationships is simple.  In addition to the fact that nearly every method for fostering personal growth and strengthening relationships depends on the ability of both partners to be open with each other, it provides the sense of satisfaction that motivates us to be involved in relationships in the first place.  The study of interpersonal relationships revolves around finding ways in which to make interpersonal connections stronger and more mutually beneficial.  This class did an admirable job of demonstrating many of the ways that one can accomplish this, and I feel that I’ve benefitted from it in that respect.  I am most grateful that we at one point touched upon the topic of openness, because although openness isn’t a topic that is highly analyzed in the study of interpersonal relationships, it is one that is often considered a prerequisite to being able to even tolerate involvement in interpersonal relationships.  It is an absolutely vital characteristic on both personal and interpersonal levels.

However, the difficulties I’ve outlined surrounding our ability to make these sorts of connections are a source of great deliberation for me.  If my journals have demonstrated anything, it’s that I have not been able to successfully establish any relationships that possess a satisfactory degree of openness this semester.  The reason for this is essentially due my own withdrawal from being open with people.  Any doubts I had that human beings were even capable of dropping pretenses and being open with each other were greatly exacerbated and reflected in my own behaviors.  At one point I tried to explain my concerns over my own withdrawal and resulting loneliness to a friend, but this person did not really reciprocate my willingness to be open, which is what I believe is responsible for determining my focus on openness as the only aspect of interpersonal relationships worth focusing on for a final reflection paper. 

The reason why I have not been able to exit this state of withdrawal is because there isn’t much of a method for fostering a willingness to be open for oneself.  Several of the articles involved outline methods by which to foster openness in a relationship, but that won’t occur unless one is willing to be open in the first place.  A therapeutic setting, as is described at length, is obviously one in which both the therapist and the patient are both willing to be open.  The same cannot be said for normal life.  On top of the lack of willingness to be open in one’s relationships, no one particularly wants anyone else to be open with them unless they are comfortable with being open themselves.  Openness is thus best created in newer relationships in which boundaries are not set and pretenses are not yet present. 

The most important step in overcoming the fear of being open is overcoming insecurities.  It is impossible to be open unless one drops the pretenses surrounding one’s interpersonal relationships or even surrounding how one views oneself.  As these pretenses are a direct result of masking insecurities, eliminating insecurity eliminates pretense.  Eliminating pretense fosters openness.  I’m not going to explain how to overcome insecurities.  Hundreds of books have been written on the subject of overcoming insecurity and still no one my age really knows how to do it at all.  Despite this, I do believe that there is a way for everyone to adopt a willingness to be open as a part of their personalities.  This is a process to which no method can be assigned, because overcoming one’s insecurities is invariably an intensely personal process.  Once one overcomes one’s own insecurities, one is ready to move on to adopting the responsibility of encouraging others to be open – not only with oneself but with other people as well. 

Although there are many angles from which I could have reflected upon my experiences in this class and their connections to my everyday life, openness is the most important.  Without the ability or desire to be open in one’s interpersonal relationships one can derive no pleasure, no satisfaction, no personal growth, and no purpose.  Thus, the fact that the interpersonal quality of openness and the personal quality of willingness to be open is so lacking scares me.  It is in the area of openness that we have the most potential to feel fulfilled in our interpersonal relationships.  This is the key to enriching our lives.  We must all be taking steps to discontinue bearing the burden of masking our insecurities with pretenses and idealized versions of ourselves – we must simply be ourselves as we are.

*Just for reference, the term “open relationships” in this context will refer to any relationships that possess the quality of openness as I’ve defined it rather than the specific type of romantic relationships.

June 10, 2011

May 29, 2011

Hypothesis

I bet there are several 5-year-olds who were able to figure this one out before me, but I still think it's important to jot down. 

Something worth noting when it comes to sadness is that it isn't necessarily the opposite of happiness.  Things are never as simple as "Happiness is to good as sadness as to bad".  I was informed recently that during the last time I was truly happy - the same time in which the first available entry on this blog appears, late summer 2009 - I was considered (apparently ubiquitously) a douchebag.  My reformation from douchehood also apparently coincided with the onset and increasing severity of my depression.  At first I thought that this was because people like me more when I'm miserable, even though misery isn't a face I wear - it's a burden I bear, alone.  This may or may not be a sad reality - I don't know, as I am not going to ask anybody (and even if I did, they'd deny that they get off on my self-imposed suffering) - but that's a standpoint that even I know is void of any serious value, despite the fact that my brain tends to warp events into the belief that all people, especially myself, are terrible.  No, the most interesting part of that revelation comes from me reviewing my life at that point in my life.

Back then, I was a lot less self-centered.  I would hardly know if it weren't for two things: 
  1. The contents of this blog reflect my primary concerns at the time of their publishing.  They were a lot less focused on me than the more recent bitchfests have been.  
  2. If I were truly less self-centered, I'd be less self-conscious/self-aware, and vice-versa. (I don't like the fact that they're synonymous but self-consciousness is always a negative trait and self-awareness is always a positive trait.  Oh well.)  I was definitely less self-aware than now if I couldn't recognize that everybody thought I was insufferable. 
Anyway, this sort of reflects my answer to the questions: "Why do I remember sadness but not bad times?" and the corollary, "Why do I forget happiness but not good times?"  Happiness is actually to good as sadness is to bad, it's just a bit more complicated than that.  We remember sadness because all it is defined by is relentless introspection, to which my last few entries can attest.  We are so fascinated by our own unhappiness to the point of being masochistic, we're so self-centered.  That's the same reason we don't remember bad times, too - we're so wrapped up in our own heads we experience life completely detached from the experiences that are often a significant cause or reason behind the sadness. 

I've operated under the somewhat misguided belief that all humans are self-centered for a while, but the corollary regarding happiness relies on the opposite being at least somewhat true.  If my happiness two years ago coincided with diminished self-awareness, that would explain both why I remember/documented all the events that took place then and why I forgot the sensation of being truly happy.  It's not because we're content with where we are and have nothing to complain about that we don't document our happiness - actually, right now, I feel like if I were happy I'd want to shout it out from the top of the Empire State Building or something - it's because we're so much less self-absorbed that we don't bother to try to intellectualize it or "focus on experiencing ourselves" to the full extent.  We focus instead on experiencing the world around us, because life is more worthy of analysis and deconstruction than ourselves when that is true. 

However, in order to defend the perspective that all people are self-centered, it's because all people are unhappy.  I wasn't kidding when I said we have a fascination with our own sadness.  I don't think there is much more to add to that other than "Blame TV, Facebook, etc. for that".  Anything that fuels our own self-absorption is a source of misery.  Now if only TV and Facebook weren't the two things I spent most of my time doing besides sleeping... (sleeping is also a pretty self-absorbed activity, too.  And even then it fits into my hypothesis pretty nicely - we don't remember the experience of sleeping but remember and constantly long for the sensation.)  

May 28, 2011

Top 50

So anyway, I'm going to take a break from ceaseless self-analysis because it's a hugely self-indulgent and masochistic exercise.  Writing, on the other hand, is not.  I figured that in order to be able to call myself a proper film guy it's important that I list my favorite (and I'll admit this is nowhere close to a perfect list) movies and a brief description of why I like them. Keep in mind that I tried to be inclusive of all genres and that beyond the first eight or so the order stops being relevant. 
  1. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - This is the movie against which I can safely judge the quality of most other movies.  The plot?  Bulletproof idea.  The acting?  Oscar-worthy.  The screenplay?  Oscar-winning, in fact.  But the real success of the movie comes from the fact that it dissects the oft-pondered and nigh-imponderable topic of love and companionship in a highly surreal and cerebral fashion. 
  2. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory - My love for this movie relies hugely on nostalgia and the fact that watching it is magically faith-restoring.  Pure Imagination is without a doubt my favorite song of all time, too.
  3. Pan's Labyrinth - I've only seen this one time but it left a huge impression on me.  A lot of my favorite readings revolve around magical realism, which this movie embodies better than any other that I can think of.
  4. Almost Famous - Coming-of-age stories don't get much cooler than this.  Almost perfectly captures what it's like to be a young teenage boy while at the same time telling a larger-than-life and largely true story.
  5. City of God - This is the movie Slumdog Millionaire wanted to be and whose heights it couldn't reach.  Also, this has some of the most beautiful cinematography ever. 
  6. Inception - This movie made me realize that all other movies are just condescending.  Few movies are this elaborately and well plotted and the fact that it manages to be simultaneously gripping is a huge accomplishment. 
  7. Children of Men - One of the best depictions of dystopian sci-fi in movies with gratuitous long shots that I have always found far more engaging than the typical fast cuts you'd find in these sorts of movies to mask CGI effects, etc.
  8. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - It's impressive enough for the first 30 minutes of a movie to be interesting and engaging while taking place from the same perspective in the same room.  It's even more impressive for a movie to create such a detailed, emotional, and beautiful portrait of a man locked in his own body. 
  9. Ferris Bueller's Day Off - I shouldn't have to describe why I love this movie, you probably understand it.  But I'll let you know that watching this movie under the popular fan theory that Ferris is just a figment of Cameron's imagination makes the movie a masterpiece. 
  10. District 9 - In case you're wondering why this movie is ranked so high, it's because I appreciate that it exceeds all expectations for its plot and characters.  Few movies succeed as well on so many levels - effects, acting, plot, cinematography, dramatic effect, etc.  Despite the fact that it is decidedly less award-baity than most other movies on this list it gets a higher rank. 
  11. The Big Lebowski - I know a lot about the narrative structure from reading TV Tropes like a madman, but how this movie was constructed will always escape me.  Hilarious.
  12. Groundhog Day - Despite its nearly ubiquitously poor execution in movies and TV, time travel is one of my favorite plot devices and this movie is one of the few to be able to do it right. 
  13. Kill Bill -The modern standard for revenge flicks, and Tarantino's best for those among us (me!) who found Pulp Fiction to be a bit too indecipherable to be better than this.  Although if I were being realistic with my selections and wasn't trying to include as many directors and genres as possible, both Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Basterds would also be on this list, and very high.  
  14. The Neverending Story - Childhood classic that has somehow actually improved with age, unlike most products of the 80s. 
  15. Brick - Film noir + high school + Joseph Gorden-Levitt = Awesome.
  16. Oldboy - More revenge?  This movie covers the same ground as Kill Bill but somehow in an even more melodramatic, violent fashion.  
  17. Big Fish - Tim Burton's best movie ever, probably because it was one of his least macabre.  He needs to do more like this instead of shit like Alice in Wonderland.  
  18. Avatar - Shut the fuck up, this movie made you jizz in your pants when you saw it and anybody who disagrees is a damn liar.  The fact that this manages to work even with a cliche storm of a plot is evidence that tropes are not bad. 
  19. Once - A musical with a score that isn't mixed poorly might be all that's necessary to beat the rest, but the fact that it still manages to be good in all other respects is admirable. 
  20. Grizzly Man - This movie is the best documentary I've ever seen, ever.  Basically a complex character study, except with fucking bears.  I almost wish it weren't a documentary so people don't avoid it for that label, because this movie is utterly fascinating.
  21. Where the Wild Things Are - This is the only kid's movie ever to capture what it actually feels like to be a kid as opposed to the way filmmakers typically perceive kids as feeling.  A hugely nostalgic experience.
  22. Good Will Hunting - A movie about wasting potential.  I don't know if I have potential, which is exactly why it's being wasted.  If there is potential for anything you can never know if you're wasting it or not, and I find that terrifying.  This movie slides onto the optimistic side of the scale, with the protagonist realizing he's capable of being better than he is, for lack of better words.  Pretty much the opposite of...
  23. Greenberg - Believe it or not, I really don't like Noah Baumbach all that much, but this is the one movie of his featuring one of his trademark terribly unlikeable protagonists that actually made a scary amount of sense to me.  I like it a lot more for its personal meaning than for its artistic merit.  Speaking of which...
  24. Vanilla Sky - I can't tell you how much I should hate this movie... but its got far too much in the way of narrative structures I actually like to really hate.  Character-driven science fiction in the same vein as Firefly, Eternal Sunshine and Vanilla Sky is the best genre for examining the "what-if" questions in a way that is actually fulfilling because the protagonist's journey is identical to the viewer's, even especially if the protagonist is a jackass. 
  25. Mulholland Dr. - I almost gave up on this movie based on the fact that it didn't seem like anything but the TV pilot that I later found out it was supposed to be for the first hour or so.  But once Naomi Watts reveals her character's hidden depths (i.e. the audition scene) the movie becomes one of the most massively cerebral and engaging experiences to be seen on film.  
  26. The Fountain - Yeah, fuck me for putting what many consider to be Aronofsky's worst movie as the best, but this movie has a better plot, writing, and acting than people give it credit for in addition to some of the best cinematography and the single best score of all time.  
  27. The Blair Witch Project - I realize that these past several choices have all been controversial, but this movie was deeply unsettling because the idea of getting lost is something that I've never seen explored as in-depth as it was here in the horror genre despite the fact that it is a terrifying experience.  Mission accomplished, stupid dead teens in the woods. 
  28. Danny Boyle - I can't choose between his movies.  It's like asking to pick a favorite child, and if I could I would pick all of them.  Trainspotting, Millions, 28 Days Later,  Slumdog Millionaire, 127 Hours and even the weird "slasher in space" Sunshine are all favorites because even though they often cover very dark, grim subjects, few filmmakers can capture the sensation of happiness on film quite like Boyle.
  29. The Matrix - For the same reasons everybody else likes them.  The sequels are good too, despite popular opinion on the matter, if only for the action scenes.  I remember the freeway chase and the battle in Zion more fondly than any action scene from the first one, even if the latter two are overwritten and sort of nonsense. 
  30. Serenity - I enjoy watching this movie whenever possible due to the fact that it is the conclusion to my favorite show of all time, Firefly, but it also works very well as a standalone.  One criticism from the standpoint of a fan of the show is that it isn't as heavily invested in all of the characters as the show was, but that makes it quite a bit easier to follow for an outsider than one might think.  In fact, I saw the movie before I'd even heard of the show and enjoyed the idea of the Space Western quite a bit.
  31. Spaceballs - Spoof movies are a genre that needs to be vindicated, and I'm afraid that the genre has been thoroughly killed and buried by the shit shoveled out by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer.  If there is ever to be any evidence that spoofs were ever good, look to Mel Brooks.  This one is a personal favorite of mine. 
  32. Being John Malkovich - Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich Malkovich.
  33. (500) Days of Summer - At the time that I saw it, possibly the most uplifting movie ever made.  Now, a guide for the neurotic young adult on how the world of love and relationships works.  Owes a lot to Eternal Sunshine despite being a far less complex viewing experience. 
  34. Howl's Moving Castle - I recognize the superiority of Spirited Away, but this is a list of my favorites, not the list of the best movies I can think of.  This is the movie that got me into Studio Ghibli and it is undoubtedly one of their better products.  Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away get honorable mentions. 
  35. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - Appreciated above all others for its artistic merit and (sorry) epic time-travelling finale.  Despite the fact that the previous two movies were higher-grossing and the plot of the books doesn't come to the turning point until the end of the Goblet of Fire, this was the game-changer for the movies as it demonstrated that they were more than stiflingly faithful adaptations of the novels, that these children can act, and that time travel doesn't suck.
  36. Shawshank Redemption - I am not a film critic.  This movie doesn't embody the sort of mastery that has earned The Godfather or Citizen Kane or anything their labels as the greatest films ever made.  But I'll be damned if this isn't one of the most uplifting, soulful, resonant movies ever made, and it's unfair to judge cinematic greatness on terms outside of the impact on its audience.  Speaking of which...
  37. Toy Story 3 - The first movie created a new art form and did so with style.  The second movie demonstrated that this art form wasn't a gimmick and could convey emotions as well as a live-action film.  The third reduced this man to weeping like a little girl.
  38. Primer - If you haven't picked up on it yet, time travel gets a bad reputation due to the number of instances in which it is demonstrated poorly.  This is the example of time travel plots done right.  The events of the plot are confusing as fuck but the time travel mechanism is explained, and the paths of the protagonists through time are clear.  Also notable for being a champion of low-budget cinema.
  39. Let The Right One In - The timing of this movie amidst the Twilight-fueled vampire craze is hilarious, because I get the feeling that the vampire romance in this movie is exactly what Twilight was aiming for but instead got the exact opposite - both the genuinely frightening implications of being in love with a monster and the inherent sweetness of the relationship between the leads drive the movie.
  40. The Fox and the Hound - My favorite Disney Animated Classic, for obvious reasons.  Anyone who doesn't like this movie has no soul.
  41. Leaving Las Vegas - Damn depressing.  I watched this movie with the belief in my head that, against all odds, the main character would stick to the predicted narrative structure of overcoming his addiction and getting the girl.  Nope.  Two hours of a man drinking himself to death.  
  42. I Love You, Man - A movie starring Jason Segel and Paul Rudd about the beautiful relationship known as bromance.  What's not to love?  Also notable for being the source of many phrases that have actually entered my everyday speech (and the phrase "totes" which has entered everybody's everyday speech).
  43. The Truman Show - Duh.  Let's see what else is on.  
  44. Donnie Darko - A must-have for a list containing lots of critically-acclaimed films involving time-travel.  Too bad Richard Kelly is like the M. Night Shyamalan of indie movies.  Apparently this movie being good was an accident.
  45. Dark City - A movie that caught me off-guard.  I was expecting a movie similar to The Matrix, which this is compared to all the time.  They are similar in terms of their simulated reality concept, but beyond that they share almost nothing except being good.  One thing I liked more than The Matrix was how the ability to alter reality at will - essentially being the God that Neo was made out to be over the course of three films - was deconstructed more completely in five minutes.  
  46. House of Flying Daggers - I needed to include at least one martial arts epic.  I used to watch a ton of them, for a reason that mostly escapes me to this day.  This movie is over-the-top gorgeous, dramatic, and thrilling.  
  47. The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra - I couldn't not include this.  An extremely affectionate parody of cheaply-made 1950's era sci-fi B movies that is so realistic you'd almost mistake it for one at first glance if you didn't understand those sort of Earth jokes.  
  48. The Dark Knight - Easily the best superhero movie since the revival of the genre in the late nineties.  I shouldn't have to explain why because you've seen this movie.  
  49. The Crow - I'd intended to see this for a while simply due to its awesome soundtrack, but I didn't anticipate the movie to be so... cool.  I mean, a lot of that is probably owed to the comic, but the main character is immune to bullets, kills people off in awesomely brutal fashion, plays guitar on rooftops, is crazy good at parkour and kung-fu, and wears clown makeup while doing all of those things to really angry 90s alternative rock.
  50. The Royal Tenenbaums - Wes Anderson saved the world with this movie. With a movie invoking the dysfunctional family reunion trope you would expect a feature-length sitcom, but instead get a dramedy where each and every character is interesting, endearing, and believable despite their unbelievable lives.  That just goes to show you how far acting chops can get you.