The 10 Heaviest Movies of the 2000s, Ranked
His favorite directors include Martin Scorsese, Sergio Leone, Akira Kurosawa, Quentin Tarantino, Werner Herzog, John Woo, Bob Fosse, Fritz Lang, Guillermo del Toro, and Yoji Yamada. He's also very proud of the fact that he's seen every single Nicolas Cage movie released before 2022, even though doing so often felt like a tremendous waste of time. He's plagued by the question of whether or not The Room is genuinely terrible or some kind of accidental masterpiece, and has been for more than 12 years (and a similar number of viewings).
When he's not writing lists - and the occasional feature article - for Collider, he also likes to upload film reviews to his Letterboxd profile (username: Jeremy Urquhart) and Instagram account.
He has achieved his 2025 goal of reading all 13,467 novels written by Stephen King, and plans to spend the next year or two getting through the author's 82,756 short stories and 105,433 novellas.
If you were put on the spot and asked what came to mind first when you heard the words “2000s movies,” you might fall back on The Lord of the Rings (any of the three, or maybe all three), any number of classic Pixar movies released that decade, or superhero movies like Spider-Man or Iron Man. You might not instantly think of the darker and more despairing movies that came out that decade, but in any event, there were quite a few.
Maybe you do like it darker. Maybe those movies did come to mind. The decade wasn’t necessarily a darker one than usual, in terms of what films came out, because there are downbeat movies made every decade (every year, really). And the following titles are among the absolute heaviest that came out between the years 2000 and 2009.
10 'Hunger' (2008)
Hunger is one of many intense movies set largely inside a prison, but the fact that this one’s based on a true story puts it a cut above most prison dramas, as far as emotional intensity is concerned. It’s all about a hunger strike in the early 1980s, done while The Troubles were ongoing, and orchestrated by Bobby Sands, a member of the IRA.
Michael Fassbender stars as Sands, and it stands as the actor’s favorite movie of all the ones he’s appeared in. It was also something of a breakout role for Fassbender, alongside the similarly heavy-going Shame (2011), and hey, what do you know? Both those movies were directed by Steve McQueen (and McQueen and Fassbender would collaborate once again in 2013, for 12 Years a Slave). But regarding Hunger, no punches are pulled throughout, and it is genuinely impressive how persistently gritty, grimy, and solemn this film feels.
9 'Oldboy' (2003)
There’s a bit of action to be found in Oldboy, and it’s generally faster paced than a lot of the soon-to-be-mentioned movies, yet the story it chooses to race through relentlessly is exceptionally grim. It’s about a man imprisoned under suspicious circumstances, and what he does once he’s suddenly released about 15 years on from the initial imprisonment (to put it bluntly, he wants both answers and revenge).
From there, Oldboy… well, Oldboy goes to some unpredictable places, or at least those places were unpredictable before Oldboy became one of the most famous and enduring international movies of the 21st century so far. If you’ve got a decently strong stomach, and are yet to know about the manner in which Oldboy ends, it’s almost certainly worth watching ASAP.
8 'Synecdoche, New York' (2008)
It’s hard to know where to start when it comes to summarizing Synecdoche, New York, if a summary is even possible with a movie this ambitious. Uh… well, maybe the most obvious thing about it is that it contains one of Philip Seymour Hoffman’s best-ever performances, and considering how many great performances he gave in his life, that’s saying quite a bit.
In terms of the filmmaking, it’s Charlie Kaufman at his most Kaufman-y, perhaps thanks to the fact that he wrote and directed this one, setting it apart from other movies he’d played a role in making before 2008, like Being John Malkovich and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, as he wrote both of those without directing. And both of those were pretty heavy-going at times, yet felt kind of approachable or even borderline-wholesome compared to the confounding and troubling Synecdoche, New York, which unpacks the human condition and a bunch of difficult emotions in almost too effective a manner.
7 '4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days' (2007)
One of a fair few genuinely great movies to come out in 2007, 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is a Romanian film about the hardships a young woman and her friend go through while trying to arrange an abortion at a time in history when such a procedure was illegal in Romania. The title refers to how long one of the women has been pregnant, with the events of the film itself taking place over a short span of time (only about 24 hours).
It’s grim stuff for the reasons you might expect such a movie to be, and then additionally grim for some other reasons you might not expect; the execution of it, and all. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is great, though, and was also a deserving Palme d'Or winner, even if it’s far from the sort of film you can just sit down and watch at any time.
6 'Werckmeister Harmonies' (2000)
Werckmeister Harmonies, directed by Béla Tarr, isn't as well known as Sátántangó, which is easily one of the heaviest films of the 1990s, but Werckmeister Harmonies is arguably the better film overall, and it’s equally heavy. It achieves that heaviness with a more merciful runtime, too, being a bit under 2.5 hours long, compared to the 7+ hour-long mammoth anti-epic that is Sátántangó, and sorry to keep going on about Sátántangó, but you can really tell both it and Werckmeister Harmonies come from the same filmmaker.
Werckmeister Harmonies is all very trance-like and pretty engaging, despite being slow-paced and honestly fairly light on narrative.
With Werckmeister Harmonies, it’s about people being miserable in a small town that degrades at an accelerated rate after a strange circus arrives there. It’s all very trance-like and pretty engaging, despite being slow-paced and honestly fairly light on narrative. It’s a tough sell for reasons beyond how depressing it is, but if you're okay with something that takes its time while being unafraid to make you miserable, it could be worth a watch.
5 'Martyrs' (2008)
Frequently labeled one of the most distressing horror movies of all time, Martyrs really does live up to its reputation, since it hits hard on more than one front. It’s incredibly gruesome, with the story it tells that’s initially about revenge (and eventually about something arguably more distressing), and then it’s also psychologically confronting and thematically troubling in ways that unsettle more than the purely violent moments.
It’s the worst of both worlds, in other words, or the best of both worlds, since the intention here was to make something incredibly hard to watch, not to mention difficult to sit with and think about once it’s all over. Martyrs is sort of impressive on that front, even if the lengths it goes to in pursuit of being as disturbing as possible make it a fairly hard film to recommend to most.
4 'The White Ribbon' (2009)
Taking place not long before World War I, The White Ribbon isn't quite a war movie, but whatever it is, it’s depressing as hell. It takes place in a village somewhere in North Germany during the 1910s, and showcases a series of strange and upsetting events happening to the people who live there, with a particularly grim focus on the children of this particular village.
Even saying what the basic premise is, and when it all takes place, feels like giving away a bit too much, since The White Ribbon keeps things mysterious a good deal of the time, and it really takes its time in revealing certain things, making it something of a (particularly slow-paced) mystery film. It’s inevitably powerful stuff, though, and can be used pretty effectively if you want to argue that Michael Haneke can actually make a Béla Tarr film better than Béla Tarr himself ever could.
3 'Requiem for a Dream' (2000)
Requiem for a Dream is maybe a little too aggressive in its whole “drugs are bad, mkay?” kind of thing, providing a series of worst-case scenarios for a group of characters who all have their lives changed – and eventually defined – by drug use and addiction. It’s one of the least subtle movies of all time, to the point where it’s probably most effective on younger viewers over anyone else, even if it’s got a good deal of content that isn't suitable for most younger viewers.
The bluntness found in Requiem for a Dream is still somewhat admirable, especially if you approach it as more of a cautionary tale than a genuinely realistic or nuanced look at how addiction can change one’s life. You’ve always got Trainspotting if you want something a bit more balanced, and that one is also horrific at times, albeit a good deal more realistic and generally more empathetic to the majority of its characters, too.
2 'Irreversible' (2002)
One of the most harrowing movies about revenge ever made (and that’s saying something; see also the aforementioned Oldboy), Irreversible plays out in reverse chronological order, which makes things both less surprising and more upsetting, somehow. You see a violent act of vengeance, then see what provoked such an act, which recontextualizes what you’ve already seen, and then things end with the characters at peace, unaware of the horrors to come (the horrors you’ve already witnessed).
It’s certainly an arthouse kind of approach to this particular genre, and so it doesn’t really feel like spoiling the overall story to outline it like that. You know how it ends from the start, because it begins how it ends, and there are still things to gain from watching the movie and better understanding how things “start” or “end.” However you choose to engage with or analyze Irreversible, it’s devastating, not to mention mortifying in just how extreme the content gets.
1 'Dancer in the Dark' (2000)
Dancer in the Dark is like the definitive heavy/bleak/intense musical, or the best of the best when it comes to anti-musicals, if you feel like defining it as such. It starts out downbeat, focusing on a single mother who’s progressively going more and more blind while struggling to provide for her son, doing all she can to ensure he keeps his sight, unlike her.
So, if City Lights (1931) were a musical, a crime/drama film more than a romantic dramedy, and also downright depressing rather than merely bittersweet, maybe it’d look a little something like Dancer in the Dark. It’s an incredible movie for sure, but there’s a reason why it’s a go-to pick whenever the topic of “the most depressing movie of all time” comes up, as a discussion, so singling it out as the heaviest release of its decade honestly feels fair.
Dancer in the Dark
- Release Date
- October 6, 2000
- Runtime
- 140 Minutes
- Director
- Lars von Trier
- Writers
- Lars von Trier, Sjon
Cast
-
Björk -
Catherine Deneuve
💬 No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!