I’ve renamed these “My Year in Film” as opposed to “The Year in Film” after already publishing the first entry, animation. My feeling is that since I’m only listing films I’ve seen and wanted to see, as opposed to every single film I’ve missed—not to mention that these are my opinions and I’m not claiming to be the definitive guide to all things good and evil—”My” lends this series a nice and subtle personal touch.

That said, making this list has been helpful in figuring out what my tastes are. I used to make goals each year to see every movie that comes out, of which I fail miserably. But now I realize: what’s the point? There is so much useless junk out there and every time I see one of those I’m missing out on a real gem. I’m also starting to see that I have far more respect for those films that aim high and fail than those that cruise by and somehow end up quite good.

For those just tuning in, I’ve decided to group my best of ‘09 list by genre, just so I can get my bearings. I failed to write reviews for so many films this past year that it’s hard to make a complete master list right off the bat. Today we’re focusing on fantasy, a rather short list this year, and then each day following I will work my way through science fiction, horror, comedy, and lastly drama.

Superb

I had given up on Terry Gilliam until I experienced “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.” I thought he had grown tired like Tim Burton and Steven Spielberg. All his films are dense, confusing, and absurd, and many people find them indecipherable garbage. Yet the ambition and creativity here is striking and while it may not stick all the right landings, it transfixed me from beginning to end and long after. The ideas Mr. Gilliam plays around with and those crazy visuals only he excels at wrap so tightly around a plot that seems as old as time and yet so refreshing. Even major setbacks such as the death of Heath Ledger are sources of innovation and it’s almost as if Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell were always meant to play Imaginarium-manifestations of Mr. Ledger’s character. This is pure, compelling cinema and it’s hard to deny the balls this film has, regardless of any technical deficiencies.

Great

None.

Good

“Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” sure knows its stuff visually. The scenes featuring the Weasley’s staircase and the “Lord of the Rings”-style Gandalf-gesticulations and Gollum-creatures are both grand in their own ways. And while the romantic escapades are enjoyable, the character development that really matters (Draco Malfoy) is completely nonexistent. He runs to the bathroom morally struggling and I feel like I’ve hardly met the guy. Fortunately this entry in the series is less SparkNotes and more like an actual movie (unlike the previous film) and the series seems to be in capable hands now that director David Yates has found firmer footing (probably thanks to the return of screenwriter Steve Kloves).

Average

None.

Poor

None.

Trash

“The Twilight Saga: New Moon” is just as bad as its predecessor. But while the first film didn’t know it was retarded, thus making it a brilliant comedy much like “The Happening,” “New Moon” detects a faint whiff of its own stench and gives a winking nod every once in a while. Too bad it’s boring, half-assed, and just plain silly.

Missed

I have a feeling I would have liked Paul Weitz’ “Cirque du Freak: The Vampire’s Assistant,” or at least respected it. It seems to have a great cast, a faint sense of danger, and a possibly nice twist on the current teen fantasy fad.