Was Michael Jordan NBA's GOAT? Phil Jackson reflects on the 'Masters of the Game'

TONYA MOSLEY, HOST:

This is FRESH AIR. I'm Tonya Mosley. You ever sit down with someone, start talking, and suddenly hours have passed because the stories are just that good? That's what happened during the pandemic when longtime sportswriter Sam Smith drove up to see Phil Jackson at his place in Montana. They talked players they'd known, games they've lived through, the legends, the troublemakers, and the geniuses. Phil Jackson, of course, is the coach with 11 NBA championships - more than anyone in history. He coached Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen, Kobe and Shaq. And before all that, he played 13 seasons in the league, making him one of the few living bridges between what the NBA used to be and what it's become.

And as a longtime sports writer, Sam Smith has been watching almost as long, from the smoky balcony of the Madison Square Garden on a 75-cent student pass to four decades on press row. He wrote "The Jordan Rules," an inside account of the Chicago Bulls' first championship season that examined the team's dynamics on and off the court. Their new book together is called "Masters Of The Game," which is less of a rankings book than it is a preservation project, an attempt to capture what made certain players unforgettable, the kind of greatness Phil saw up close and Sam chronicled for years. And Phil Jackson and Sam Smith, welcome to FRESH AIR.

SAM SMITH: Thank you. Looking forward to it.

PHIL JACKSON: Thanks, Tonya.

MOSLEY: It's a list of the masters of the game, but it's also a real history lesson on the NBA in general, taking us all the way back to the '40s, to the beginnings. I mean, some really funny stories that - like smoking inside of the locker room. There used to be smoke boys who would have cigarettes waiting for the players. How also the game was a small man's game, which today just seems unbelievable because, I mean, it is definitely a big man's game, you know?

JACKSON: These guys were proficient at the game and what they did. And the era that they played in didn't have the same amount of, you know, high-percentage shooting or even the access to the quality of material. I mean, they played in gyms that were hockey arenas and were converted and, you know, basically were still just coming out of the cage area when, you know, players played in cages. And local churches and ethnic groups had their own teams, and there were barnstormers that went around, like the Original Celtics and, you know, the various people that played that were predecessors of the NBA era. So those are some of the things that we wanted to get across. Some of these old-timers that were really influential in the game having to take a back seat because history has overlooked them.

MOSLEY: For modern-day folks, younger people would just be really surprised to know that basketball was considered a small man's game back then. And, like, the average player during that time, they were firemen and mailmen. They were just, like, regular guys.

JACKSON: There were talented big men, but there weren't the numbers that there are today. Their size was limited. And obviously, the court was limiting because of its depth and the actual lane size and the variety of rules that have changed the game, that have made it accessible to the modern player. So that's why it's hard to put a judgment on a modern player versus, you know, somebody from an era like Oscar Robertson or Jerry West or people from the '60s and late '50s and '60s - Elgin Baylor - that everybody knows, talent-wise, they could have been playing the game today.

SMITH: You know, Phil mentioned before the word cagers. When I was growing up in New York City, seven daily newspapers, two of which I delivered every day, basically. But one of the shorthands for basketball was cagers. That's what they called - basketball players were cagers. And the reason they called them cagers is that the game was so physical and so rough in its early years that they literally played in cages to keep the fans and the players separated because there was so much violence in the game.

MOSLEY: Wow.

SMITH: And so you talk about evolution of the game.

MOSLEY: (Laughter).

SMITH: These guys were literally playing in cages, and that's why they called them cagers in the '50s and the '60s.

MOSLEY: When I told people I was talking to you guys, I mean, I, like, immediately - and again, I want to say, like, this is people of a certain age, like, 40s and up. Immediately, people just said right away, the NBA just isn't the same. I mean, they love to complain. More recently, I just hear that more and more often, that the NBA just isn't the same. And you guys don't exactly shy away from that in the book. There are, like, little snippets where that comes out. Were you all worried at all about coming across, though, as, like, two old heads just reminiscing about the good old days?

JACKSON: We didn't care. We really didn't care.

SMITH: Right?

(LAUGHTER)

JACKSON: That was - that's kind of maybe our brusque nature. But the idea that this game is a competition that's played in narrow parameters and has, you know, used television to make it a spectacle has grown the game to great proportions where, you know, it's become an international game. And particularly, the three-point shot has brought another sense of this game into play where the idea of shooting a layup or shooting a close shot is not valued as much as shooting a 25-foot shot, which has a much lower percentage because obviously there's a point differential. So the idea is take advantage of this, and it has become the overwhelming feature in the NBA game today. However, all the lax rules that have contributed to this has kind of spiked this concept that this is what's the most important thing. It's not about how to set a pick or how do you dribble a basketball, or what's your footwork, or what kind of passes can you make? It's about getting the ball to the guy who's standing open in the corner for a three-point shot. That's become the, you know, overwhelming parameters.

However, the game still relies on penetration. That's the No.1 point of view. And in our day, in the day of, you know, playing the game with big-man centers and forwards and guards instead of all ball handlers like is kind of played today, the idea that you put passes as a priority to the game to use penetration was really the feature. And one of the things that we always remark about in the Golden State era with Steph Curry - and coached by Steve Kerr - has been their passing ability, the number of passes that they still make in a half-court setup to get the kind of shot they want to have. And I think that's what's still made the game attractive to the people who love it now, is that people pass and people set it up. And there's teamwork that's going on in the competition.

MOSLEY: Phil, as players became multimillionaires, did they get harder to coach?

JACKSON: No. I think they became - I think there's a natural instinct in players to want to be coached. They want to know if you're going to help them be better at what they do and how they can survive and succeed along with their group or their teammates. I think the younger players that are striving to reach that maximum contract have been difficult to coach. And that's a small group. That's a group of, you know, maybe five, 10 young players in each draft class that is sitting, you know, in a hope scenario where they're going to be credited to be a max player at the end of a contract. And, you know, those drives to become a max player involve not being able to sit on the bench, having to be a starter, you know, a lot of things that coincide with what's best for the team. And I think that youthful 19, 18-, 19-year-old drive can be too selfish for a team to overcome. I see that the Golden State Warriors are going through something similar to that right now with one of their players that is a highly talented kid but yet can't quite adjust to being a teammate.

MOSLEY: Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, I'm talking with Phil Jackson and Sam Smith about their new book, "Masters Of The Game: A Conversational History Of The NBA Told Through 75 Legendary Players." We'll continue our conversation after a short break. This is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF DAN AUERBACH SONG, "HEARTBROKEN, IN DISREPAIR")

MOSLEY: This is FRESH AIR. And today I'm talking to Phil Jackson and Sam Smith about their new book, "Masters Of The Game." Jackson is an 11-time NBA championship coach and former Knicks forward. And Sam is a longtime NBA reporter and author of "The Jordan Rules." Their new book together looks back at the players and stories they don't want lost to history.

You all did kind of give alternate perspectives on certain people, especially - I don't know if this is a correct observation. But I saw it the most when you talked about contemporary players like LeBron James, the self-proclaimed king. Phil, you say he's not in your Top 5 of the greatest. Although, he's a master of the game in the book. And you draw this real distinction between his game and his mentality. Can you talk about what you meant there when you say that?

JACKSON: Well, I think, you know, over the years, we've watched, you know, the physical nature of this player who has dominated the game for 20 years and came in as a high school kid and stepped right into, really within three years, was, you know, in a situation where he was making a difference in the basketball games. Definitely a master of the game. The things that were disappointing about LeBron were things that turned him into self-reflection, I would call it. Or you could see him, you know, fold a little bit in the course of a game or in the course of a series. And, you know, the number of series in the finals that he has been a losing part of are painful because I know what that's like to have lost in the finals as a player and as a coach.

These are the things that kind of haunt you. And I think it was kind of haunting. There was a situation in Cleveland where things got disturbing. And he had to challenge his love of the game or his ability to join his teammates in full participation. And there was a situation in Miami that, you know, became obvious in the playoffs with the San Antonio Spurs. And, you know, those are the things that have kind of, you know, remarked about his career, where you never saw that happen with Michael Jordan where, you know, there was a sense of quitting or a sense of defeat.

SMITH: I just want to add, every time Michael got there, you know, to the finals meaning, the opportunity to win a championship, he finished it off. And LeBron has a great run. I think he was in the finals eight times, which is an extraordinary accomplishment. But he only finishes off about three or four times. And from a writer perspective, one of the ways we sort of judge greatness is, in basketball, I got the old knack to write, play a team sport and all that. But can you give the ball to somebody, and he can finish it off for you? And LeBron has never been that kind of player.

He doesn't like to get to the free throw line at the end of the games because he gets a little nervous at the line. We talked about, you know, Elvin Hayes was kind of like that. One of the great scorers in history but didn't want the ball at the end of the game. People are different. And some people just don't want that spotlight on them. Michael drew the spotlight on him and that provoked him to play even better.

JACKSON: This is what so many people admired about Michael Jordan is he took the blows and went right back to the free throw line if he was called to foul and did not complain. And I think we all kind of admired him for the physicality of the game, which was at that time pretty hairy. The Detroit Bad Boys were at their prime. And maybe there wasn't as much fighting as there had been in the '70s and '60s, but there was still a lot of physicality that went on that, you know, targeted players. So one of the things that I admired about Michael was his ability to play when players were playing four games in five nights at that time, which they don't do anymore, that he could play that fourth game in the fifth night as hard as he played the first game in that series of games in that week.

MOSLEY: You made a point to say that you never asked him for anything. And that was important for you to note, that you never asked him for anything like autographs or to join anything. And this was deliberate, almost like a way of building trust.

JACKSON: Yeah, you know, I witnessed that with my own group of teammates, you know, that intense feeling of being surrounded and being, you know, assailed with, you know, requests. But this came when we were not, at that time, on exclusive floors in hotel rooms. And we're still staying in Holiday Inns and Ramadas and so forth. I came out of my room, which was on the top floor, and there were five people outside of Michael's door. They were all either, you know, baggage people, chefs, cleaning room people, people that were literally looking for this autograph from someone that they admired that were their own generation, their own family type of situation. And Michael took the time to do that. But when it came to, you know, going in airports that were still flying commercially at that time, it was almost like he had to go into a private room to stay out of the public view until the actual gate was open and a team could go on so that it wasn't overwhelmed by this, you know, dramatic appeal for his autograph or to touch him or to be part of it or take a picture.

MOSLEY: Yeah. But you, as his coach, I mean, you identified that for you to have that trust, to build that trust with him, to have that coach-player relationship, this component, this thing of asking him for something, even if it was anything, you made a choice to say, I'm not going to be the one to ask him for anything. How did you know that was really important in building that coach-player relationship, that trust?

JACKSON: I don't know. I think it puts you on a different level when you start asking for things. It puts you on, you know, a beneficial or receivership, and when you want to be in an influential space with someone, you want not to have that detriment, that little garbage, that little layer between you - you know? - that is - just makes a difference. And I recognize that as something that I felt was important as a leader and a coach.

SMITH: I was around Michael from the beginning when he came to Chicago in '84, and at the draft, Rod Thorn said, look, he's a really good player, but it's not like he's going to change the franchise or something.

MOSLEY: (Laughter).

SMITH: So it's like, OK. And I watched this development of his stages, going through multiple coaches. He had a different coach first three years every year, different players he was playing with. He mentioned in his "Last Dance" documentary about his - being a roving drug gang, which it was. Literally half his teammates from his rookie year went into drug rehab. It was a bad era for the NBA for that. And one thing with Michael is people wanted stuff from him all the time, and he distrusted if you wanted something from him. And I noticed with Phil that - 'cause early on, Michael was very dubious about Phil. Yeah, 'cause Phil, I remember when he came in, said, and he pointed out only one player in the last 25 years, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar had won a championship while leading the league and scoring.

Michael was leading - he liked leading the leading and scoring. And I remember when Phil got the head coaching job, that's - I wrote the story. I'm sure Phil didn't like it. I talked to Michael the day Phil got the job and said he was going to institute this offensive triangle and quoted Michael saying, well, I'll give it three games. Let's see how it works. And so - but I did notice that relationship that Phil wasn't asking Michael for things. He was trying to help him improve. And over the years, that's what I've seen in players. They want two things from a coach - just two things. Are you credible, do you know what you're doing? And can you help me be better? And that - and I thought that was really the reason why Phil, and then later, even Kobe, too, despite issues, you know, that they had, really came to trust Phil and moreso the system of play, which enabled them to succeed.

MOSLEY: Our guests today are legendary NBA coach and former player Phil Jackson and veteran sports journalist Sam Smith. We'll be right back after a short break. I'm Tonya Mosley, and this is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF WYNTON MARSALIS' "JUMP START - THE MASTERY OF MELANCHOLY: BOOGIE WOOGIE STOMP")

MOSLEY: This is FRESH AIR. I'm Tonya Mosley. And today we're talking with Phil Jackson and Sam Smith, two men who, in very different ways, helped define how we understand the NBA. They've written a new book called "Masters Of The Game" where they explore the contributions of NBA players over the generations.

Phil Jackson is best known as the coach with 11 NBA championships, more than anyone in league history. He led the Chicago Bulls through the Jordan-Pippen era, and later, the Los Angeles Lakers with Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal. Before that, he spent 13 seasons as a player, starting in 1967 with the New York Knicks. He's written several books about leadership, mindfulness and basketball philosophy. And Sam Smith has been writing about the NBA for more than four decades. He authored "The Jordan Rules," which offered an unvarnished look at Michael Jordan and the championship Bulls. Before that, he covered politics in Washington, then became Chicago Tribune's lead NBA reporter.

Kobe Bryant, like most who came after Michael Jordan, Kobe was greatly influenced by Jordan. And before we get to your relationship with him, Phil, I want to actually talk about his significance to the game. Phil, where does Kobe fit for you among the greats?

JACKSON: Well, you know, he's in the book. And he's one of the guys that won, you know, five championships, which means something. And he's been, you know, a great scorer. And he's been a big-time player at the end game situation and has made really good decisions in competitive, in real competitive nature of games. And he's had a big influence on this generation that has followed, big influence.

MOSLEY: Your relationship, there's been so much written about it. We watched it, the complexity of it. But Kobe once said that your ability to connect with players was your biggest strength, that you'd study, as we know, psychology and human development and read about how they grew up to figure out how to reach them. And with Kobe, what did you have to learn to reach him?

JACKSON: Well, he's very sensitive and that he does not take criticism lightly. That he did not want to be compared to Michael even though his game emulated Michael, down to the fact that he even did a number of physical movements that could only have been influenced by watching "Come Fly With Me," which was a important videotape of Michael Jordan's heroics that came out in, like, 1990 or '89. Sometime right around there. And, you know, it just was a huge influence on a kid like Kobe who was, you know, probably 10, 11, 12 years of age, where boys are, you know, gravitating towards what they can do well. And this is something that he knew he could do really well.

So his game was to compete on a level that was comparable to Michael Jordan's. And when he first came into playing for the Lakers when I was coaching, it was not the role I was going to perhaps give him. I gave him a lead guard role, which meant he had to set up the floor. He had to, you know, be able to feed Shaq, who was the primary focus of the game. And he had to take the leftovers, as part of the game, as it came to him. And a lot of times, he felt left out, like I need to explore my own part of the game. So that's where initially we had to be juggling things a little bit between each other.

So, you know, he had to kind of face that and figured it out. And figured out how to do it. And eventually, I moved him into a role that was very similar to Michael Jordan's, which gave him much more latitude in the game, as we became adapted using a guy named Lamar Odom, a guard. A 6'9 forward became a lead guard - or an off guard. We had a two-guard front. So, yeah, there was room for him to grow and for me to accommodate.

MOSLEY: Yeah. One of the things you discovered - well, unlike Jordan, you discovered that he was a big reader, Harry Potter and fantasy and wizards.

JACKSON: Yeah.

MOSLEY: How did that change things, as far as your relationship, when you discovered that?

JACKSON: Well, I'd cured him about, you know, of the statement that he wanted to be captain of the team. He was 22. And I was like, well, you don't go out with the players. The players tell me you stay in the room all the time. You watch tape of the game last night that you played. You're not interested in the conversations that they're having. And, you know, if you want to be a leader, you need to, you know, really rub shoulders with your teammates. And he was like, well, you know, they're into hubcaps and their cars and the girls and clubs and rap music. And, you know, those aren't the passions that I have right now. Basketball is my focus. So I could see that.

So I started, you know, giving him books, like leadership books. The leadership of, you know, Winnie the Pooh and the Dove leadership. And, you know, some books that were, you know, kind of, like, just talking about, you know, growing into the role that he was going to play. And one of the things about basketball that's happened is, in the days when players matriculated out of college or their college class matriculated into the NBA, players played three or four years in the NCAA in college. And as they went through their college years, they grew into a leadership role.

And suddenly, the NBA started getting players that were either before they went to college, as the result of Kobe Bryant and, you know, Kevin Garnett and some other players that came in the game prior to even going to college. And so they never assumed or grew into a role of leadership. And that was one of the things I was concerned about with Kobe. But he became a really good leader and took it to heart.

MOSLEY: Is it right that you went to see Kobe at his office in Orange County a week before he died?

JACKSON: Yeah.

MOSLEY: Yeah. What did you guys talk about?

JACKSON: We talked about the good times. We talked about some of the things - about basketball. Talked about his kids, that he was coaching a girls' team of basketball where Gigi was part - and really a dominant player in that world or that league. Talked about his traversing from Orange County up into the Valley into Westlake and, you know, taking helicopters and, you know, who - that world that he knew a little bit because he'd used helicopters to travel from LAX, the airport in LA, down to Orange County after we'd come in at 2 in the morning. So, you know, he had confidence.

And, you know, it was heartbreak for us that were close to him. And, you know, literally a family of girls and a wife that had, you know, really been with him since he was a 20-year-old. So yeah, it was tragic. And yet his legacy, I think, has really shown up. I mean, it's been played out, and, you know, young players are carrying him forward and using his example of hard work and tenaciousness and competitiveness to their advantage.

MOSLEY: You know that Kobe wasn't always beloved by the media. Of course, all of those things that happened, the charges, you know, it really set the course right at a time when he was - his star was rising. But then things shifted by the end. And what did you see as a reporter, as a journalist covering it, you know, seeing that full circle right before he died?

SMITH: Well, part of it is you see on TV still - I mean, and I don't know if - who endorses more products, Shaq or Peyton Manning, but they pretty much endorse everything between the two of them. And Shaq was this incredibly popular figure with media. And when he had this - you referred to it, too - the falling out, the rivalry with Kobe in those couple of years that eventually led to Shaq's trade. And we've - Phil talked about that, and we've talked about that - you know, his MBA story, or I wrote about it. Phil witnessed it firsthand, tried to litigate it. But Shaq literally, because he - and he was so popular. He literally went to reporters at the time. I remember I was among those. And he asked you to choose sides. Actually, I chose Kobe. I was one of the few who kind of sided with Kobe, right? You have to...

MOSLEY: What do you mean choose sides?

SMITH: He - if you weren't going to write a nice - you know, treat me - be my - you know, be sort of in my - and reporters end up doing that. You don't want to do it. You want to create - you know, maintain independence, and most everybody did. And Shaq verbalized it. I heard it. It was verbalized to me too, as well, as, you know, you're either with me, sort of against me. And so, you know, I admired Kobe more because he was serious about the game. You know, Shaq would - as Phil knew, too, understood. I'm sure it was frustrating. He'd sort of spend the season getting in shape. Came to the playoffs, he was - could average 40 and 20.

MOSLEY: Yeah, in his hotel room, watching plays. Yeah, yeah.

SMITH: Yeah. He could have been the best player in history. He was so physically dominant. If Shaq took the game seriously, nobody could've competed with him. Kobe took the game seriously because he wasn't as physically talented. His hand wasn't as big like Jordan. He couldn't palm the ball like that and dominate the game. And so you sort of had to make a distinction, and I kind of sort of gravitated over toward Kobe's side.

MOSLEY: Yeah. Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, we're talking with Phil Jackson and Sam Smith about their new book, "Masters Of The Game," a reflection of 75 defining players in NBA history. We'll be right back after a break. This is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF NONAME, ET AL.'S "BALLOONS")

MOSLEY: This is FRESH AIR. And today, we're talking to Phil Jackson and Sam Smith about their new book, "Masters Of The Game," a collaborative look at the players, eras and untold moments that shaped professional basketball.

You know, I can't help but see the history of race in America interwoven into these conversations between the two of you. I think about, Phil, when you first started as a player. You know, it wasn't long after the league was integrated. So you were there with these players, hearing stories from them. A lot of these players shared their racial traumas with you. You saw it firsthand. You and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, one of the masters of the game listed in the book, had an interesting relationship when you played together because you talked religion and history and jazz, but you also got into race. Phil, you know you've been called out over the years for comments that critics say kind of reveal your discomfort with Black culture. Scottie Pippen said some things about you that a lot of people stood up and said, like, we don't believe this. This is not true. But he called you a racist. I mean, how do you receive that stuff when you reflect on your time and the comments that you've made over the decades?

JACKSON: Well, can't recall any of the comments I made that have been controversial. But certainly, that is a difficult, you know, thing to hold up with - that, you know, once you're called a racist, it becomes, like, a label. And you don't live away from it or you don't overcome it by saying, no, some of my best friends are Black.

MOSLEY: (Laughter).

JACKSON: You know, that's not how you do it. You know, there's no redeeming value in that particular thing. But it was an incident - that was an incident in which Scottie didn't get the opportunity, and he was kind of lashing out about an incident in which - you know, it was, you know, a basketball reaction and a basketball decision that I made. But one of the joys of being able to play in the NBA has been the relationship and the teammates that I've been able to play with that have come from all diverse groups of people. And the African American kids that have grown up in certain situations that have been trials - like, Walt Frazier grew up in Buttermilk Bottoms in Atlanta. And, you know, his dad was a numbers guy, and he had all sisters around him growing up. And there was a certain kind of support (ph) or rapport (ph) that he had with the community because of it. And, you know, Earl Monroe seeing someone killed in his neighborhood growing up as a kid. And, you know, those things are - leave remarkable images and damages to your soul and heart. And so for me, being a kid growing up in Montana and North Dakota, these were experiences I could only relate to as, you know, unique experiences that were tribulations and trials that people overcame. They were heroes. They were really something very special to come and have that ability to play.

MOSLEY: What's something from this book, from your lives covering or being in the NBA or being a coach in the NBA that you want a young fan in 50 years maybe to hold on to? 'Cause you've now written this book that is now a chronicle. You know, it's a piece of history that we can now look back on.

SMITH: My point would be sort of the history. Sort of appreciate what and who has come before you, what they achieved, how they went about it, and sort of learn from it and respect it. And, you know, that's kind of what I did. I mean, obviously, it was a joy spending time with Phil and being able to share all these memories and the history. I think, you know, that's sort of the fun of it. But also to appreciate, you know, what those who've preceded you went through and had to overcome. Those obstacles you even related to before to help, you know, get a sort of - to stand on the shoulders of the past kind of thing.

JACKSON: Nice, Sam. Yeah, I would say, Tonya, that it's been my privilege to be in the NBA, around the people in the NBA, and to have played with teammates that have won championships and have coached players that have been desirous of being unselfish, cooperative and desirous of competing at a high level and accepting the coaching and the instructions and the lifestyle and culture that somehow surrounded them when I've been in their presence.

MOSLEY: Phil Jackson and Sam Smith, thank you both.

SMITH: You're welcome.

JACKSON: Thank you.

SMITH: Good to talk to you. Thank you.

MOSLEY: Phil Jackson and Sam Smith. Their new book, "Masters Of The Game," is a reflection on 75 defining players in NBA history. Coming up, film critic Justin Chang tells us his favorite films of the year. This is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

TONYA MOSLEY, HOST:

This is FRESH AIR. Film critic Justin Chang spent a lot of time this year watching movies at festivals and theaters and on his couch. He says that contrary to what popular opinion or gloomy box-office headlines may tell us, 2025 has been the strongest year for new movies in a long time. Here's Justin's list of the best films of the year.

JUSTIN CHANG, BYLINE: Anyone will tell you that these are tumultuous, borderline-apocalyptic times for the film industry. Box office is down. The threat of AI looms. Billionaires and tech giants are laying waste to what remains of the major Hollywood studios. I'm not entirely sure how to square all this bad news with my own good news, which is that I saw more terrific new movies this year than I have any year since before the pandemic. True, most of those movies weren't from here, but all of them played in U.S. theaters in 2025, and all of them are well worth seeking out in the weeks and months to come.

The best new movie I saw this year is "Sirat," a breakthrough work from a gifted Spanish filmmaker named Oliver Laxe. It's a nail-biting survival thriller set in the desert of southern Morocco during what feels like the end-times. It's a little "Mad Max," a little "Wages Of Fear," and all in all, the most exhilarating and devastating two hours I experienced in a theater this year. "Sirat" also features the year's best original score, composed by the electronic musician Kangding Ray.

The second film on my list is "One Battle After Another," Paul Thomas Anderson's much-loved, much-debated reimagining of Thomas Pynchon's novel "Vineland." An exuberant mashup of action thriller and political satire, it stars Leonardo DiCaprio in one of his best and funniest performances as an aging revolutionary drawn back into the field. He leads an ensemble that includes Teyana Taylor, Benicio del Toro, Sean Penn, Regina Hall and the terrific discovery Chase Infiniti. In this scene, DiCaprio's character, Bob Ferguson, calls up someone from the French 75, the underground movement he was part of years earlier. Unfortunately, he can't remember the elaborate series of passphrases needed to verify his identity.

(SOUNDBITE OF FILM, "ONE BATTLE AFTER ANOTHER")

LEONARDO DICAPRIO: (As Bob Ferguson) Well, look. Look, maybe I can give you some information, and then you give me some information, all right? We'll just share a little information. My name is Bob Ferguson. I don't know if you've ever heard of me, all right? I was part of French 75 for years, years and years, all right? They used to call me Ghetto Pat, Rocketman, stuff like that. Only problem is, I've fried my brain since then, man. I have abused drugs and alcohol for the past 30 years, man. I'm a drug and alcohol lover, and I cannot remember, for the life of me or the life of my only child, the answer to your question.

CHANG: No. 3 is "Caught By The Tides," an unclassifiable hybrid of fiction and nonfiction from the Chinese director Jia Zhangke. Drawn from a mix of archival footage and newly-shot material, it's a one-of-a-kind portrait of the myriad transformations that China has gone through over the past two decades.

At No. 4 is another structurally bold Chinese title. It's called "Resurrection," and it's a bit like an "Avatar" movie for film buffs. Placing us in the head of a shapeshifting protagonist, the director, Bi Gan, takes us on a gorgeous, dream-like odyssey through various cinema genres from historical spy drama to vampire thriller.

My No. 5 movie is the year's best documentary - "My Undesirable Friends: Part I - Last Air In Moscow" from the director Julia Loktev. It's a sprawling, yet intimate portrait of several Russian independent journalists in the harrowing months leading up to President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

As a portrait of antiauthoritarian resistance, it pairs nicely with my No. 6 movie, "The Secret Agent," an emotionally rich, sneakily funny and continually surprising drama from the director Kleber Mendonca Filho. Set in 1977, it lays bare the personal cost of dissidence during Brazil's military dictatorship.

At No. 7, is the German drama "Sound Of Falling." Although not a horror film exactly, it qualifies as the best and spookiest haunted house movie I've seen this year. Directed by Mascha Schilinski, it teases out the connections among four generations of girls and young women who have passed through the same remote farmhouse.

At No. 8 is "April," from the director Dea Kulumbegashvili. A tough, bleak, but utterly hypnotic portrait of a skilled OB-GYN trying to provide healthcare for women in a conservative East Georgian village. It may be set far from the U.S., but the difficulties these women face would resonate in any setting.

My No. 9 movie is the Zambian film "On Becoming A Guinea Fowl," directed by Rungano Nyoni. It's a subtly mesmerizing drama about a death that takes place in a middle-class household, setting off a chain of dark revelations that threaten to tear a family apart.

And finally, my No. 10 choice won the Palme d'Or at this year's Cannes Film Festival. "It Was Just An Accident" is a shattering moral thriller from the Iranian director Jafar Panahi about a group of former political prisoners who are given a rare chance at retribution. In the past, Panahi has been a prisoner in Iran himself. Earlier this month, the government sentenced the director in absentia to a year in prison. I hope that Panahi never sees the inside of a jail cell again and that his movie is seen as far and wide as possible.

MOSLEY: Justin Chang is a film critic for The New Yorker. You can find his 10 Best list on our website at freshair.npr.org.

If you'd like to catch up on interviews you've missed, like our conversation with Rhea Seehorn about starring in the new series "Pluribus" or Patrick Markee about the surge in homelessness in New York and across America, check out our podcast. You'll find lots of FRESH AIR interviews. And to find out what's happening behind the scenes of our show and get our producers' recommendations on what to watch, read and listen to, subscribe to our free newsletter at whyy.org/freshair.

(SOUNDBITE OF WYNTON MARSALIS SEPTET'S "LINUS & LUCY")

MOSLEY: FRESH AIR's executive producer is Danny Miller. Our technical director and engineer is Audrey Bentham. Our managing producer is Sam Briger. Our interviews and reviews are produced and edited by Phyllis Myers, Roberta Shorrock, Ann Marie Baldonado, Lauren Krenzel, Therese Madden, Monique Nazareth, Thea Chaloner, Anna Bauman and Nico Gonzalez-Wisler. Our digital media producer is Molly Seavy-Nesper. Our consulting visual producer is Hope Wilson. Susan Nyakundi directed today's show. With Terry Gross, I'm Tonya Mosley.

(SOUNDBITE OF WYNTON MARSALIS SEPTET'S "LINUS & LUCY")

Transcripts are created on a rush deadline, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of Fresh Air interviews and reviews are the audio recordings of each segment.